A blended model: simultaneously teaching a quantitative course traditionally, online, and remotely

Replicating Peer‐Led Team Learning in cyberspace: Research, opportunities, and challenges

“…The findings of this study add to the mixed outcomes from other studies that compared student achievement in online and face‐to‐face conditions. Some studies showed that students in the face‐to‐face out‐perform the online environment on exams, but not course projects (Tutty & Klein, ), others showed no differences in achievement (Fisher, Schumaker, Culberston, & Deshler, ; Lightner & Lightner‐Laws, ; Tomlinson et al, ), while still others showed higher levels of course and instructor satisfaction (Johnson, Aragon, & Shaik, ). This study also dispels the idea that clarification and explanation aspects of learning or the development of conceptual and methodical knowledge are hindered in online settings (Al‐Qahtani & Higgins, ; Paechter & Maier, ); rather, synchronous computer‐mediated student interactions that engage the features of cPLTL enable comparable student collaboration to those of face to face.…”

“…There is a growing amount of research suggesting that student outcomes are the same or better in online education than traditional face to face (U.S. Department of Education, Office of Planning, Evaluation, & Policy Development, ; Williams, Duray, & Reddy, ; Wilson & Allen, ). Multiple research studies have demonstrated that there are comparable student satisfaction scores and no significant difference in student achievement between blended and traditional courses (Aragon, Johnson, & Shaik, ; Block, Udermann, Felix, Reineke, & Murray, ; Du, ; Lightner & Lightner‐Laws, ; Utts, Sommer, Acredolo, Maher, & Matthews, ; Ward, ), likely because today's students are “dependent on communication technologies for accessing information and for interacting with others” (Michael, , p. 156; Oblinger & Oblinger, ). In “Getting the Mix Right Again: An Updated and Theoretical Rationale for Interaction,” Anderson (, p. 2) proposed that “no single medium is superior to the others for supporting the educational experience.…”

Business Continuity Plan in the Higher Education Industry: University Students’ Perceptions of the Effectiveness of Academic Continuity Plans during Covid-19 Pandemic

“…One must note that the students' online learning experience can only be effective if the students have high levels of self-efficacy and are self-regulated. However, studies have found that even though flexibility and autonomy are offered in online learning, students devote a small portion of their time to learning tasks and are often found to be completing their assignments right before the due dates, highlighting students' lack of self-regulation skills' to organize and manage their time well [19,20].…”

Comparing Delivery Approaches to Teaching Abnormal Psychology: Investigating Student Perceptions and Learning Outcomes

“…The flexibility of online and F2F education in blended courses presents a particular challenge to empirical studies because minor differences in the balance of online and F2F content could impact findings. For example, one study presented a highly flexible course design that let students select either an in-person, online, or interactive television course delivery for each scheduled class meeting, which resulted in similar outcomes and a high pass rate compared to F2F versions of the class (Lightner & Lightner-Law, 2016). In contrast, a randomized trial of a hybrid course on six different college campuses where students met F2F and had required online assignments once a week produced a modestly higher course completion rate among the hybrid courses (Bowen et al., 2014).…”

“…Several explanations for the rise in online and hybrid education have been offered including financial savings (Bowen, Chingos, Lack, & Nygren, 2014), student-driven integration of the Internet in their courses (Biddix, Chung, & Park, 2015), and flexibility and convenience for students and faculty (Lightner & Lightner-Laws, 2016; McWhorter, Delello, & Roberts, 2016). Whether these courses are equivalent to F2F counterparts in terms of engagement, motivation, and achievement remains in question (Collins, Weber, & Zambrano, 2014; Jaggars, 2011).…”