Online Accelerated Learning Research: A View From Within Jerome Stiller Raymond J. Wlodkowski, PhD. Center for the Study of Accelerated Learning Regis University CAEL Chicago November 11, 2004 Structure of this presentation: • Background • Project Goals Research Questions • Methods • Findings • Further Analysis and Reporting • Phase II • Implications • Q/A Online Research Project Background • Phase I : an examination of online accelerated learning. • Phase II : a comparison of online accelerated learning with classroom based accelerated learning. • Rigorous research yielding useful results. • Collaborative approach. Phase I Goals • Assess online courses in terms of learning outcomes and student perceptions; • Better understand characteristics of online accelerated learning students; • Understand the relationship of attitudes, motivation, and other factors to student performance and persistence; and • Identify variables that may indicate students who are at risk. Phase II Goals • assess and understand differences between attitudinal, motivational, instructional, and performance variables in online and classroom based accelerated courses; and • assess the quality of online accelerated courses in the undergraduate program relative to the quality of ground based accelerated courses. Phase I Sampling • All online students in Fall 03, Spring 04, and Summer 04 • Management, Management of Human Resources, College Algebra. • Recruited via email. • Offered prizes for participation. Phase I Results Overview ORS n=221 ALS n=186 EOC n=172 Human Resource Management n=84 Business Management n=68 College Algebra n=63 Fall n=94 Spring n=73 Summer n=54 Sample Demographics • Average age = 35 (sd= 8.1 range 21- 58). • Most are married (61%), some divorced (19%), some single (20%). • Most do not have kids (43%), or are 2 parent families (42%), some single parents (15%). • Median household income = $40,000 - $60,000, but 15% report over $100,000. Sample Demographics • 22% report mother having a college or graduate degree. • 20% report father having a college or graduate degree. • Most (96%) are currently seeking a Bachelor’s degree, while 60% say they plan to seek a Master’s degree. • Most (81%) work full time, 9% work part time. Paying for college • 56% receive financial aid. • 38% receive employer reimbursement. • 12% receive VA benefits. • 1% report having a scholarship. • 12% report having no outside financial support. Reasons for Attending • Almost all (96%) are here to complete a degree. • Type of programs available, academic reputation, and availability of accelerated courses were listed as among the top 2 reasons for attending. • Quality and availability of online courses also mentioned frequently as important reasons. Would they attend again? • Definitely yes – 58% • Probably yes – 29% • Uncertain - 9% • Probably no - 4% Student Concerns • Family and work responsibilities biggest concern (34%). • How to pay for education (26%). • Amount of time and/or level of work (14%). • No major concern (20%). Attitudes about Accelerated Learning • 66% prefer accelerated to traditional courses. • 29% report their preference for accelerated courses vs. traditional as dependent on the situation. • 3% prefer traditional courses. Online Readiness • 63% had “high” need to take this course immediately. • Socializing with classmates not particularly important to 49%, somewhat important to 42%, and very important to 9%. • Classroom discussion sometimes helpful to 64%. Online Readiness • 44% say they have about the same amount of time for an online class as they do a ground based class. • But 35% say they have less time to work on an online class than for a ground based class. • Over 90% report being either somewhat or very confident with the subject matter. • 80% have taken an online course before; 73% more than one. Motivation: Enhancing Inclusion • I enjoy my contact with faculty: 63% • I feel like a valued member: 62% • Makes efforts to accommodate adult students: 92% • My experience based comments are accepted by my professors: 90% Motivation: Developing Attitude • When I make mistakes, I figure out why: 94% • I ask the instructor to clarify concepts: 83% • Understanding the subject matter is very important to me: 95% • I prefer course material that really challenges me: 86% Motivation: Enhancing Meaning • I have acquired knowledge and skills applicable to work: 89% • I figure out how academic work fits with professional experience: 85% • I find the materials to be relevant: 89% • I am becoming more effective at important things as a result of this course: 88% Motivation: Engendering Competence • I think I do well in my classes: 88% • Even when the work is hard I can learn it: 91% • I enjoy increasing my understanding of the subject material: 92% • I am confident I can understand the most complex material presented: 86% Relevance and Practical Value • strong emphasis on personal relevance in this course 85% • strong emphasis on practical value in this course 90% • 70% say that the course is relevant to career goals, 23% say somewhat relevant. Relationships • Inclusive relationships with other students 82% • Encouraging relationships with faculty 80% Course Evaluations • 91% agreed that the course was a valuable learning experience. • 89% would recommend the course to others. • 93% felt the climate was friendly and respectful. • 96% felt the grading standards required college level performance. Instruction and Materials • 96% felt the instructor was knowledgeable about the subject area. • 87% felt the course module and/or syllabus was an effective learning guide. • 89% thought the course was well taught. • 84% felt the teaching methods helped them to learn. Student Performance - Methods • MT201 – sample questions from weekly exams (n=28). Excellent = 21-23; Very good = 18-20, Satisfactory 15-17, Not Acceptable = 14 and below. • BA452 & BA461 – Final Case Analyses, developed and rated by 3 faculty experts. Mean inter-rater reliability = .88 Student Performance – MT201 • n= 28 • Excellent: 29% • Very Good: 39% • Satisfactory: 14% • Not Acceptable 18% • But – complete performance data missing from 56% of students! Student Performance BA452 N= 63 Not acceptable to less than satisfactory Critical Practical Knowledge Writing Thinking Application Base Skills 11% 11% 14% 2% Less than satisfactory to satisfactory 6% 6% 13% Satisfactory to more than satisfactory 38% 40% 32% 6% More than satisfactory to very good 17% 21% 16% 5% Very good to near excellent 27% 21% 22% 36% Near excellent to excellent 6% 2% 3% 51% Student Performance – BA461 .n= 34 Critical Practical Knowledge Writing Thinking Application Base Skills Not acceptable to less than satisfactory 12% 3% 12% Less than satisfactory to satisfactory 12% 18% 23% 3% Satisfactory to more than satisfactory 29% 41% 27% 12% More than satisfactory to very good 15% 12% 9% 9% Very good to near excellent 29% 26% 15% 50% Near excellent to excellent 3% 15% 26% Analysis Issues and Directions • What are the compelling questions that can be answered by these data? • Missing data has not been examined, for example looking at students who dropped. • Correlational analysis (e.g. motivational variables with performance) and by group analysis (e.g. dropped vs. finished). Phase I Final Report • Includes data from all 3 semesters. • Presents aggregated and disaggregated data. • Includes recommendations and suggestions for improvement. • Draft to be completed by Dec. 20, 2004. • Available for review prior to publication. Phase II • Planned in close cooperation with the Dean, the Associate Dean for Undergrad, Director of Distance Learning, DL staff, Chairs of Business and Math Depts. • Began in September 2004 and will continue through Spring 2005. • Extensive administration and faculty buy in is necessary for a quality research project. • Will hopefully generate attention and excitement in the accelerated learning community. Phase II Challenges • Logistics of matching online and ground based courses and facilitators. • General lack of interest by online students. • Frequent flyers. • Faculty support. Acknowledgements: • Bill Husson, Vice President and Academic Dean, School For Professional Studies • Marie Friedemann, Associate Dean, SPS Undergraduate Programs • Ellen Waterman, Director, SPS Distance Learning Program • Don Schierling, Chair, SPS Business Dept. • Mohammed Lotfy, Chair, SPS Math Dept. • Brave and/or enthusiastic faculty members Want to find out more about accelerated learning? • Commission for Accelerated Programs www.capnetwork.org