do the data support our assumptions?
DESCRIPTION
Do the Data Support our Assumptions?. Charles D. Dziuban Patsy D. Moskal University of Central Florida. UCF terminology for courses utilizing web instruction. “ W eb ” Courses: delivered entirely over the Web, with no regular class meetings - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Do the Data Support our Assumptions?](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062721/5681377d550346895d9f17bc/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Do the Data Support our Assumptions?
Charles D. Dziuban
Patsy D. Moskal
University of Central Florida
![Page 2: Do the Data Support our Assumptions?](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062721/5681377d550346895d9f17bc/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
UCF terminology for courses utilizing web instruction
• “Web” Courses: delivered entirely over the Web, with no regular class meetings
• “Mixed-mode” Courses: some face-to-face instruction is replaced with web instruction so that on-campus time is reduced
• “Enhanced” Courses: delivered entirely in face-to-face mode, but with web enhancements
![Page 3: Do the Data Support our Assumptions?](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062721/5681377d550346895d9f17bc/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Distributed Learning Impact Evaluation
Students Faculty
Reactive behaviorpatterns
SuccessSatisfaction
Demographicprofiles
Retention
Strategies forsuccess
Online programs
Writing project model
Large online classes
Higher orderevaluation models
Student evaluation ofinstruction
Theater
Informationfluency
Alumni
![Page 4: Do the Data Support our Assumptions?](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062721/5681377d550346895d9f17bc/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Student Results
![Page 5: Do the Data Support our Assumptions?](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062721/5681377d550346895d9f17bc/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Student satisfaction in fully online and mixed-mode courses
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
39% Fully online (N = 1,526)Mixed-mode (N = 485)
41%
11% 9%
Very SatisfiedUnsatisfiedSatisfied
Neutral
38%
44%
9%
Very Unsatisfied
3%5%
1%
![Page 6: Do the Data Support our Assumptions?](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062721/5681377d550346895d9f17bc/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Students’ positive perceptions about blended learning
• Convenience
• Reduced Logistic Demands
• Increased Learning Flexibility
• Technology Enhanced Learning
Reduced OpportunityCosts for Education
![Page 7: Do the Data Support our Assumptions?](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062721/5681377d550346895d9f17bc/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Students’ less positive perceptions about blended learning
• Reduced Face-to-Face Time
• Technology Problems
• Reduced Instructor Assistance
• Overwhelming
• Increased Workload
Increased OpportunityCosts for Education
![Page 8: Do the Data Support our Assumptions?](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062721/5681377d550346895d9f17bc/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Student Generations
![Page 9: Do the Data Support our Assumptions?](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062721/5681377d550346895d9f17bc/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Some characteristics of the generations
• Matures (prior to 1946)• Dedicated to a job they take on• Respectful of authority• Place duty before pleasure
• Baby boomers (1946-1964)• Live to work• Generally optimistic• Influence on policy & products
• Generation X (1965-1980)• Work to live• Clear & consistent expectations• Value contributing to the whole
• Millennials (1981-1994)• Live in the moment• Expect immediacy of technology• Earn money for immediate
consumption
![Page 10: Do the Data Support our Assumptions?](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062721/5681377d550346895d9f17bc/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Students who were very satisfied by generation
0
10
20
30
40
50
60 55%
38%
26%
Boomern=328
Generation-Xn=815
Millennialn=346
Per
cent
![Page 11: Do the Data Support our Assumptions?](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062721/5681377d550346895d9f17bc/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Better able to integrate technology into their learning by generation
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Per
cent
67%
48%
34%
Boomern=328
Generation-Xn=815
Millennialn=346
![Page 12: Do the Data Support our Assumptions?](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062721/5681377d550346895d9f17bc/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Students who changed approach to learning because of Web by generation
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Per
cent
51%
37%
23%
Boomern=328
Generation-Xn=815
Millennialn=346
![Page 13: Do the Data Support our Assumptions?](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062721/5681377d550346895d9f17bc/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
College Level Academic Skills Test (CLAST) English scores
540
610
680
750
820
890
960
Boomer Generation-X Millennial
Mea
n C
LA
ST S
core
n= 1,268 n= 8,861 n= 6,164
548
782
953
![Page 14: Do the Data Support our Assumptions?](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062721/5681377d550346895d9f17bc/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Student Behavior Types
![Page 15: Do the Data Support our Assumptions?](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062721/5681377d550346895d9f17bc/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Research on reactive behavior patterns
• Theory of William A. Long, University of Mississippi
• Ambivalence brings out behavior patterns
• Provides a lens for how “types” react to different teaching styles
![Page 16: Do the Data Support our Assumptions?](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062721/5681377d550346895d9f17bc/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Resources
• Personality
• Emotional maturity
• Sophistication level
• Level of intellect
• Educational level
• Character development
![Page 17: Do the Data Support our Assumptions?](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062721/5681377d550346895d9f17bc/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
A description of Long behavior types
• Aggressive Independent• high energy• action-oriented• not concerned with approval• speaks out freely• gets into confrontational
situations• Passive Independent
• low energy• not concerned with approval• prefers to work alone• resists pressure from authority
• Aggressive Dependent
• high energy
• action-oriented
• concerned with approval
• rarely expresses negative feelings
• performs at or above ability
• Passive Dependent
• low energy
• concerned with approval
• highly sensitive to the feelings of others
• very compliant
![Page 18: Do the Data Support our Assumptions?](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062721/5681377d550346895d9f17bc/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
A description of Long behavior traits
• Phobic
• exaggerated fears of things
• often feels anxious
• often sees the negative side
• doesn’t take risks
• Compulsive
• highly organized
• neat, methodical worker
• perfectionist
• strongly motivated to finish tasks
• Impulsive
• explosive
• quick-tempered
• acts without thinking
• frank
• short attention span
• Hysteric
• dramatic and emotional
• more social than academic
• artistic or creative
• tends to overreact
![Page 19: Do the Data Support our Assumptions?](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062721/5681377d550346895d9f17bc/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Distribution of Long Types and Traits for Fully Online Students
AI21%
PI18%
AD54%
PD7%
51%
75%
26%
30%
(N=1,533)
![Page 20: Do the Data Support our Assumptions?](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062721/5681377d550346895d9f17bc/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Distribution of Long Types and Traits for Mixed-Mode Students
AI17%
PI23%
AD52%
PD8%
54%
76%
23%
32%
(N=472)
![Page 21: Do the Data Support our Assumptions?](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062721/5681377d550346895d9f17bc/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Distribution of Long Types and Traits for Composition I Students
AI20%
PI23%
AD44%
PD14% 50%
53%
38%
40%
(N=1,054)
![Page 22: Do the Data Support our Assumptions?](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062721/5681377d550346895d9f17bc/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Long Types and Traits for Web, Mixed-Mode, and General Education Students
Web(N=1,533)
Mixed-mode(N=472)
Comp I(N=1,054)
Aggressive
Dependent
54% 52% 44%
Passive Dependent
7% 8% 14%
Compulsive 74% 76% 53%
Impulsive 26% 23% 38%
Typ
esT
rait
s
![Page 23: Do the Data Support our Assumptions?](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062721/5681377d550346895d9f17bc/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Long type by generation
0
20
40
60
80
100
Baby Boomer
Per
cent
Gen-X
Millennial
AggressiveIndependent
n=312
PassiveIndependent
n=256
AggressiveDependent
n=794
PassiveDependent
n=108
23% 22% 17% 17% 16%20%
55% 54% 53%
4% 8% 10%
![Page 24: Do the Data Support our Assumptions?](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062721/5681377d550346895d9f17bc/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Students who were very satisfied by generation and Long type
0
20
40
60
80
100
Baby Boomer
Per
cent
Gen-X
Millennial
AggressiveIndependent
n=118
PassiveIndependent
n=88
AggressiveDependent
n=336
PassiveDependent
n=33
53%
37%
24%
41% 37%
22%
79%
61%
40%
54%
33%
19%
![Page 25: Do the Data Support our Assumptions?](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062721/5681377d550346895d9f17bc/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Student Ratings
![Page 26: Do the Data Support our Assumptions?](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062721/5681377d550346895d9f17bc/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Facilitation of learning
Communication of ideas
Excellent Very Good Good Fair Poor
Then...
The probability of an overall rating of Excellent = .93 &
The probability of an overall rating of Fair or Poor =.00
If...
A decision rule based on student evaluation responses and the probability of faculty receiving an overall rating of Excellent
![Page 27: Do the Data Support our Assumptions?](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062721/5681377d550346895d9f17bc/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
A comparison of excellent ratings by college unadjusted and adjusted for instructors satisfying Rule 1
College Unadjusted % Adjusted %Arts & Sciences 41.6 92.4
Business 34.9 90.9Education 56.8 94.8
Engineering 36.2 91.3H&PA 46.1 93.9
(N=441,758) (N=147,544)
![Page 28: Do the Data Support our Assumptions?](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062721/5681377d550346895d9f17bc/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
A comparison of excellent ratings by course modality--unadjusted and adjusted for instructors satisfying Rule 1
F2F 42.0 92.2E 44.0 92.3M 40.6 92.0W 55.4 92.7ITV 20.9 86.7
CourseModality Unadjusted % Adjusted %
N=709,285 N=235,745
![Page 29: Do the Data Support our Assumptions?](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062721/5681377d550346895d9f17bc/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Research Initiative for Teaching Effectiveness
For more information contact:
Dr. Chuck Dziuban(407) 823-5478
Dr. Patsy Moskal(407) 823-0283
http://rite.ucf.edu