Online Learning Efficacy Research Database

The Covid-19 pandemic has had a major impact on the various facets of higher education globally. With the migration to online teaching happening at an unprecedented rate, educators are challenged in transforming the way they create opportunities for students’ learning. Specifically, in Australia, education providers have increasingly offered their courses in a dual-mode setting, making them available for both online and face-to-face students. This paper presents the design of a specific type of dual-mode teaching, referred to as mixed-mode teaching used in an introductory economics course at X University. The aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of the mixed-mode teaching in creating an equitable learning experience for the online and face-to-face groups of students enroled in the course. Such an approach should then translate into there being no significant difference found in the academic performance of the two cohorts. In this study, we used the non-parametric Wilcoxon test and Kruskal-Wallis test to verify if a significant difference exists in learning satisfaction. Further, we utilised regression with dummies, and four different approaches of propensity score matching estimation in excluding self-selection bias, to evaluate differences in academic performance. Our results suggest no statistically significant differences in both the learning experiences and academic performances of our two groups of students. At a time when higher education is facing ongoing challenges presented by the pandemic, these findings offer useful insights for economics educators as well as those in higher education about how to enhance students’ academic performance and learning experience through more equitable, consistent course design. 
[less]

Information and technology has now become the key to academic success of students at various levels of education. Blended Learning strategy is viewed as resourceful and innovative instructional strategy which can elegantly integrate traditional instructional convention method and e-learning method. The purpose of the research work was to study the effectiveness of blended learning instructional strategy on social science achievement of Class-XI students and to observe the difference between the students taught by blended learning strategy and face-to-face traditional instructional strategy. Experimental method was adopted for the present study. The researcher has employed the tools, viz. achievement test in economics and blended learning instructional package for this experimental study. The findings of the study reveal that the blended learning strategy is more effective than the face-to-face traditional instructional method for the academic achievement. The study found that blended learning strategy has improved the academic achievement of students in posttest. 
[less]

The following study contrasts the efficacy of online delivery relative to face-to-face delivery using an enrolment protocol that largely eliminates self-selection bias. Only a few previous studies even attempt to control for sample selection. The study utilizes random assignment of the registrants of a Principles of Macroeconomics class into two alternative venues: online and face-to-face. The same professor taught both sections with the same course objectives and exams. Both the change in student scores from the pre-test to the post-test and the student’s exam average are model led as a function of the course environment, the student’s SAT math score (or ACT equivalent), the student’s GPA prior to taking the course, the student’s gender and the student’s overall credit hours prior to taking the course. The pre- and post-test had both standardized and instructor-specific questions. Students in the face-to-face section have statistically significantly higher exam scores and statistically significantly greater improvement on the post-test instructor questions. There is no statistical difference in the improvement on the post-test overall nor in the improvement in the post-test standardized questions. These mixed results suggest that both course objectives and the mechanism used to assess the relative effectiveness of the two modes of education may play an important part in determining the relative effectiveness of alternative delivery methods. 
[less]

Over the past decade, there has been a large increase in the number of colleges and universities that offer fully online courses and blended courses (courses with a face-to-face component and with an online component). The number of students enrolling in these courses has also increased. These courses are less costly for universities to offer and provide students with more flexibility than traditional classes. This study examines the relationship between online learning and knowledge retention in introductory economics courses. Student assessment data are matched to transcript and demographic information to control for individual student attributes. Using a differences-in-differences matching estimator, we determine the effect online coursework has on knowledge retention by comparing performance on the assessment. Results suggest that while there is no significant difference in student learning, students in more traditional, technology-free courses retain the material better than students. 
[less]

Empirical studies have yielded mixed results with regard to the issue of whether the online and traditional modalities have equivalent effects on learning outcomes for courses taught at the Master of Business Administration (MBA) level. A majority of these empirical studies support the conclusion of no significant difference between the modalities. However, only a small percentage of these studies address the issue of self-selection bias, and fewer study the hybrid format. This paper reports on a study that contributes to the existing MBA literature by employing a research design that appropriately handles self-selection bias in the context of a hybrid course. The key finding of the study is that the effect of the online format on learning outcomes does not handicap outcomes relative to the traditional format. 
[less]

This study examines the effect of blended coursework on student learning outcomes in introductory economics courses. The effect of blending on learning is determined by comparing scores on quizzes and exams between students in a blended course (the treatment) and students in a traditional face-to-face course (the control). This study accounts for the potential bias due to non-random selection into treatment by using propensity score matching. The results indicate no significant effects of blending on student learning. 
[less]

Designing a hybrid course entails the challenge of choosing learning activities for each of the face-to-face and online environments--and sequencing and coordinating the activities across the two environments--to promote student attainment of the course’s learning objectives. This paper presents a study comparing student performance in an undergraduate Principles of Microeconomics course taught by the same instructor under hybrid (n = 51) and face-to-face (n = 24) delivery. The percentage of hybrid students completing the course (71%) was not significantly different (chi-square = .61, p = .433) than that (79%) of the face-to-face students. A regression analysis controlling for student GPA indicated that, for students completing the course, the composite test score was, on average, an estimated 4.8 percentage points lower (p = .025, one-tailed) under hybrid delivery than under face-to-face delivery. Student GPA had a strong positive ceteris paribus impact (p = .000, one-tailed) on the composite test score. The finding of a lower level of student learning under hybrid relative to face-to-face delivery is attributed to inattentiveness to pedagogical principles in designing the hybrid course. The study serves as a caution to colleges and universities initiating or expanding their hybrid course offerings in the absence of faculty training or quality control checks. The paper closes with suggestions for further research. 
[less]

This study compares student perceptions, learning behaviours and success in online and face-to-face versions of a Principles of Microeconomics course. It follows a Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) approach by using a cycle of empirical analysis, reflection and action to improve the learning experience for students. The online course design involves 58 interactive narrated online modules, interactive online quizzes and biweekly online meetings with the instructor via video and voice-over-IP technology. Findings indicate that schedule flexibility motivates students to choose the online course format. Students in both learning environments felt they had high-quality communication with the instructor, while online students indicated limited peer-to-peer communication. Online students report studying more at home than face-to-face students, but not enough to compensate for the time face-to-face students spend in class. Reflecting on the findings, the authors suggest actions to improve the online course experience. 
[less]

Although still in its infancy, the use of the internet as a means to teach college courses, including economics, is growing. Previous research concerning the level of student learning in economics courses via the internet versus a traditional classroom has been scant and inconclusive. This paper explores the factors that influence student performance in both principles of macroeconomics and principles of microeconomics and compares student achievement in courses taken in traditional classroom settings with those done via the internet. We provide a brief summary of the relevant literature, a description and statistical analysis of our data, and a discussion of our findings. Future ideas for research are noted. 
[less]

This paper describes an experiment focused on measuring and explaining differences in students learning between online and face-to-face modes of instruction in college level principles of economics courses. Our results indicate that students in face-to-face sections scored better on the Test of Understanding College Economics (TUCE) than students in online sections. We find that failure to account for the self-selection of students into online or face-to-face sections biases toward zero the differential in TUCE scores between online and face-to-face students. Online students score a statistically significant 3–6 fewer correct answers, out of 33 questions, than face-to-face students in the selection-corrected model. However, an endogenous switching model finds that students who select into the online classes perform better than they would, all other things constant, in a face-to-face class. Other results suggest caution in using the web to teach underclassmen. 
[less]