Student Success in Online, Mixed, Direct Courses

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Overview
Contributions to the Literature
References

Overview

Public colleges are growing their matriculation faster than four-year colleges. Nevertheless, even supposing that public institution student populace is increasing quicker than in four-year universities, the resources and budget at these institutes have not increased. This has directed universities to discover alternate ways to satisfy the needs of their students. Increasing public college admission, unambiguously in online and progressive courses, requests the necessity for research with this populace for the reason that a small number of studies emphasizes on online scholars in public colleges (Ashby, Sadera, & McNary, 2011).

Description of the Research Problem

The purpose of the study was to conduct research which compared student accomplishments in a course accessible in three dissimilar learning settings (online, mixed, and direct). The current research has revealed that the educational environment has an impact on the progressive students’ accomplishment rates. The problems that they encountered became the reason for numerous students to leave the university. Moreover, the possibility of having online and mixed courses only amplified the severity of the problem. The study was conducted to certify that the universities are proposing learning prospects that endure the accomplishments of students signed up for these courses.

Research Methodology

This research employed quantitative study methodologies to equate student achievement rates in diverse learning settings. The data from 167 partakers was collected together with demographic data, unit examination scores, and uniform math test grades. The key research question that the study had to answer was the existence of a relation between the type of educational environment and the effective student performance as measured by a preliminary exam, course exam, and course grade. Student accomplishment is well-defined as passing the exam, thus allowing the student to attend the university-level math classes. Consequently, educational setting assessments were made under two circumstances: comparing all scholars irrespective of course accomplishment, and comparing scholars after they have enrolled the course.

Data and Research Conclusions

The outcomes of the one-way ANOVA exhibited that there were noteworthy alterations between educational settings with the students in the mixed courses having the minimum success (Ostertagová & Ostertag, 2013). Further investigation was done to address problems of reduction of the workforce since these rates are typically high for public college students and online scholars. Data examination with the sample that was attuned to the reduction of workforce displayed that the direct method students performed the worst.

Contributions to the Literature

The discoveries of this research oppose the present research results of no substantial variance in success based on educational setting. In this research, students from the mixed group performed poorer than the direct group students when not taking the reduction of the workforce into consideration. Nevertheless, in view of the students who finalized the class, the performance of direct group students was worse.

Critique of the Article

The title of the article is vibrant and straight to the point. The abstract of the article is relevant, specific, and consistent (Khezrlou, 2012). Additionally, the critic believes that not a single section of the paper should be removed considering the fact that the structure of the study is remarkably similar to the Rojewski, Lee, and Gemici’s (Rojewski, Lee, & Gemici, 2012). The purpose of the article is perfectly outlined. Hypothetical and other related aspects affecting preservation and workforce maintenance in remote education classes need to be addressed in imminent studies, specifically bearing in mind the fact that similar results have been obtained as a result of a multiple regression study (Nelson & Zaichkowsky, 2015). The authors of the study presented appropriate statistical methods but failed to present the procedures in a way that would let a reader interpret the results properly. The authors of the article proved to be objective, and the work does not include any ambiguous statements or repeat any content (Kuo, Walker, Schroder, & Belland, 2014).

References

Ashby, J., Sadera, W. A., & McNary, S. W. (2011). Comparing Student Success Between Developmental Math Courses Offered Online, Blended, and Face-to-face. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 10(3), 128-140.

Khezrlou, S. (2012). The Relationship between Cognitive and Metacognitive Strategies, Age, and Level of Education. The Reading Matrix, 12(1), 50-61.

Kuo, Y., Walker, A. E., Schroder, K. E., & Belland, B. R. (2014). A Predictive Study of Student Satisfaction in Online Education Programs. The Internet and Higher Education, 20, 35-50. Web.

Nelson, L. R., & Zaichkowsky, L. D. (2015). A Case for Using Multiple Regression Instead of ANOVA in Educational Research.The Journal of Experimental Education, 47(4), 324-330. Web.

Ostertagová, E., & Ostertag, O. (2013). Methodology and Application of Oneway ANOVA. American Journal of Mechanical Engineering, 1(7), 256-261.

Rojewski, J. W., Lee, I. H., & Gemici, S. (2012). Use of T-test and ANOVA in Career-Technical Education Research.Career and Technical Education Research, 37(3), 263-275. Web.

Click Here To Order Now!