University of Phoenix



Experienced Faculty Rate Distance Education Most Effective Kelley A. Conrad, Doctoral Program Faculty for IO Psychology, Herman Van Niekerk, Associate Dean of Instruction Doctoral Business Programs,University of Phoenix School of Advanced Studies, andCornelius Brown, Deputy Sector Navigator for the California Community College Chancellor OfficeAt the beginning of 2017, the US National Center for Educational Statistics projected there were 17.3 million students in colleges and universities in the United States and 3 million in post baccalaureate programs. Students take classes in various types of classrooms but the three main ones are traditional face-to-face classrooms, online classrooms, and mixed classrooms using face-to-face and online approaches. However, what instructors do in their classrooms and if or how the type of classroom structure affects student outcomes have not been studied extensively. We found a few qualitative studies where instructors described their approaches and techniques in interviews. We also found some disagreements about key terms used to describe classrooms and teaching. Barr and Tagg (1995) found student-centered approaches more effective than teacher or content centered approaches. Hiebert and Grouws (2006) described the effects of teaching on student learning as open ended. We found one direct comparison exploring student learning comparing online with traditional environments (Angiello, 2010). In addition, the U.S. Department of Education published a meta-analytic study (Means, Toyama, Murphy, Bakia, & Jones, 2010) reviewing more than a thousand studies of online learning which reported “on average, students in online learning conditions performed modestly better than those receiving face-to-face instruction” (p. ix). Unfortunately, we found no studies that specifically explored all three of the main classroom types with respect to important student and administrative outcomes. Developing a better understanding of effects of varying operationalization of the college classroom can contribute to improved effectiveness in teaching and education. MethodProblem StatementAs part of a larger survey investigating how teachers develop grades for students, we examined instructor ratings of the three major classroom structures for differential effects on 38 key teaching and administrative outcomes. Our research question was, “How do experienced college and university instructors rate the three major classroom formats for effects on student and administrative outcomes?”ParticipantsParticipants were solicited by email from several academic faculty ListServs and the attendance list from the 2016 DT&L conference. The final sample was a convenience sample of 148 experienced faculty responding as having taught more than 15 college or university classes. All indicated they were trained and knowledgeable about their university procedures. All participants received and agreed to informed consent though the opening page of the survey. DesignOur study was descriptive quantitative design utilizing a section of an online survey exploring the perceptions of experienced faculty about the effects of type of classroom on student and administration outcomes. Our survey consisted of 38 questions on assessment and grading, a ranking of 15 assessment practices, evaluations of 35 types of assessments, ratings of the influences of 8 factors that affect grades, and 6 changes in educational environment that affect grades. Also included were demographic factors and two brief open ended questions. The demographic and descriptive data collected enabled the comparison of key student and administrative outcomes for the three classroom types. Only those data are included in this study and report.ApprovalThe research was approved by the University of Phoenix Institutional Review Board and the Committee on Research. Admission to the survey was controlled by Survey Monkey item programming that did not permit a participant to proceed to the survey questions if they did not electronically sign the informed consent document. Participation was voluntary. ResultsSample Demographic CharacteristicsGenderFrequencyPercentFemales10872.9Males3624.3Other42.8Years TeachingFrequencyPercent1-396.14-92214.910-144329.015+7248.6Missing21.4The survey was administered to lists of instructors from US colleges and universities. The following were the regions represented and number of respondents from that region: New England (11), Middle Atlantic (15), East North Central (16), West North Central (24), South Atlantic (40), Mountain (18), Pacific (22), and Missing (5).Outcome Items by Classroom TypeInstructors judged distance instruction highest in comparison with traditional classes and mixed classes on the following items:Where specific learning objects were most influential;Where using group work was common and influential; Where the student level of efforts was highest;Where student mastery of material was highest;Where grading of all assignments was important;Where standardized tests were most frequently used;Where participation, accuracy, and mastery of content were most important in determining student grades;Where student work habits have the most influence;Where instructors feel grades should reflect student effort;Where the importance of assigning zeros for incomplete assignments;As classes valuable for selecting, identifying, or grouping students;As classes most frequently used to evaluate school programs;Where criterion referenced grading is used.Traditional classes were judged highest on classes where:Level of responsibility was highest;A greater variety of assessments of student progress are made;Where norm referenced grading is used.Classes using a mix of traditional classroom and distance instruction were judged highest where:Providing feedback to students;When students need to be motivation was provided to students;As more challenging to grade;The objective is to teach student responsibility;The objective is to motivate students;It is desired to measure student progress;Attendance has the greatest influence on grades;Behavior and attitude in class impact grades; Students can use extra credit to improve scores;Quizzes are used in evaluation and teaching.ConclusionsIn contrast to many fears that have been expressed claiming distance teaching online is less effective than traditional classes, we found experienced faculty rated it as more effective in achieving 15 of 38 student outcomes included in our survey. This was consistent with the U.S. Department of Education meta-analytic study (Means, Toyama, Murphy, Bakia, & Jones, 2010) but a stronger effect than reported there. Second, most effective in achieving desired outcomes were mixed mode classes combining distance learning techniques with face to face classroom exposure. Experienced instructors rated the traditional classroom as effective for the fewest number of student outcomes. These results can help instructors and administrators who are designing courses for maximum impact and which support administrative tracking.Presentation FormatePoster Session or Speed SessionPresentation TitleExperienced Faculty Rate Distance Education Online Classes most Effective for Achieving Many Student and Administrative OutcomesAudience ServedDistance Learning Faculty, College and University Administrators for Distance Learning Programs, Faculty Learning and Development Mangers and Instructors for Distance Learning Programs, Educational ResearchersPrior Presentation ExperienceDr. Conrad is co-author of two books: The Handbook of Psychological Assessment in Business, and Current Perspectives in Industrial-Organizational Psychology. He is the author and editor of the leading chapter, Diversity across Cultures, in the forthcoming book, Diversity and Inclusion in the Global Workplace: Aligning Initiatives with Strategic Business goals. Twelve of his papers have been published in professional journals. He has presented 26 papers at professional conferences and at four previous DT&L conferences. Dr. Conrad has also completed many projects for various organizations as a consultant and is a licensed I-O Psychologist in Wisconsin.ObjectivesKey Objective 1: Discover, collect, analyze, and report experienced college faculty perceptions of the effectiveness of traditional classroom instruction contrasted with distance learning and with composite classrooms related to important student and administrative outcomes in the courses they teachKey Objective 2: Provide data to counter arguments criticizing distance learning as an effective approach to college and university education. Key Objective 3: Report the major areas where experienced college and university faculty see distance learning as superior to other classroom modes. Key TakewaysA clear understanding of the superiority and importance of distance education; A list of specific areas where distance education is rated superior in achieving student and administrative outcomes as rated by experienced college and university faculty.Relevance to the fieldEffectiveness of distance learning techniques continues to generate criticism despite growing research evidence the approach is effective. Exploring the effectiveness of distance learning is relevant because of the growing numbers of programs and the emergence of hybrid classrooms. Knowing how experienced instructors evaluate the effectiveness of the three primary types of classroom can help instructors and administrators when designing or modifying programs to make more effective design decisions. Promotional ParagraphThis study explored perceptions from 148 experienced college and university instructors about the influences of type of classroom on key student and administrative outcomes. Online distance education was rated the best approach for 15 of 38 outcomes. Mixed classrooms added an additional 10 best outcomes. These results counter criticisms of distance learning as less effective than traditional face-to-face classes. Presenter Summaries K.A. Conrad, Ph.D. is the full time faculty for the Industrial-Organizational Ph.D. Program with University of Phoenix School of Advanced Studies. A licensed I-O psychologist, he teaches graduate courses in industrial psychology, organizational psychology, research methods, and research design. He has taught online courses for 14 years and was named Faculty of the Year in 2014 for the School of Advanced Studies.Address: 435 Wells Street, Apt. 209 Delafield, WI 530718 Phone: 262-443-3662 E-mail: Kelley.Conrad@phoenix.eduH.J. van Niekerk, Ph.D. is Associate Dean of Instruction Doctoral Business Programs, University of Phoenix School of Advanced Studies. An experienced educator and academic with a demonstrated commitment for excellence in higher education and development of working professionals, he is a proven leader in the management of a private business school with broad experience in campus administration, curriculum design and development and quality assurance standards. An expert in educational methodologies with a deep knowledge of action learning and its application in the development of working professionals he has been a regular participant in international management conferences.Address: 1625 W. Fountainhead Parkway Tempe, AZ 85282 Phone: 602-387-2764 E-mail:Nerman.vanNiekerk@Phoenix.edu C. Brown, MBA, MS currently is the Deputy Sector Navigator for the California Community College Chancellor’s Office. Cornelius is also an adjunct faculty member at the University of the Pacific, and the University of Phoenix. Cornelius holds an undergraduate degree from CSU Sacramento in Psychology, a Master’s Degree in Human Resources Management from National University, and a Master’s Degree in I-O Psychology from the University of Phoenix. Cornelius is a Doctoral student at the University of Phoenix. His proposal topic is grade inflation in higher education.Address: 9772 Sand Hollow Way Elk Grove, CA 95757 Phone: 916-224-5593 E-mail: cbrown@yccd.edu ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download