分组

EB1S01：

企业家以及环境

EB1S02：

创业以及机会识别

EB1S03：

小型企业资源

EB1S04：

创业能力

EB1S05：

管理电子商务

EB1S06：

毕业企业项目

高分

(gt;65%)

22

37

31

30

20

12

中等

(54–65%)

31

27

22

26

20

20

低分

(40–53%)

21

15

10

27

14

17

不及格

(lt;40%

24

22

22

16

16

31

分组

EB1S01

EB1S02

EB1S03

EB1S04

EB1S05

EB1S06

高分

(gt;65%)

57.64

61.78

56.21

62.10

50.90

50.29

中等

(54–65%)

67.52

62.96

52.27

60.19

41.65

49.47

低分

(40–53%)

43.57

40.93

45.05

43.15

32.07

42.82

不及格

(lt;40%

23.96

25.05

14.18

22.31

11.56

29.65

plt;0.001

plt;0.001

plt;0.001

plt;0.001

plt;0.001

plt;0.001

模式

高分(%)

中等(%)

低分(%)

不及格(%)

EB1S01

90.39

91.23

90.04

75.07

EB1S02

86.75

82.11

75.57

65.49

EB1S03

68.66

63.52

59.07

31.42

EB1S04

78.63

80.53

78.09

67.72

EB1S05

70.55

66.29

65.80

57.48

EB1S06

51.68

53.87

45.26

35.57

分组

EB1S01

EB1S02

EB1S03

EB1S04

EB1S05

EB1S06

高分

(gt;65%)

17.60

44.06

41.23

19.46

31.11

35.36

中等

(54–65%)

24.50

41.60

39.98

22.10

33.07

35.00

低分

(40–53%)

21.70

39.18

32.56

剩余内容已隐藏，支付完成后下载完整资料

Performance in e-learning: online participation and student grades

Jo Davies and Martin Graff

摘要：The beneficial effects of learners interacting in online programmes have been widely reported. Indeed, online discussion is argued to promote student-centred learning. It is therefore reasonable to suggest that the benefits of online discussion should translate into improved student performance. The current study examined the frequency of online interaction of 122 undergraduates and compared this with their grades at the end of the year. The findings revealed that greater online interaction did not lead to significantly higher performance for students achieving passing grades; however, students who failed in their courses tended to interact less frequently. Other factors that may be salient in online interactions are discussed.

Introduction

It has been suggested that interaction in online learning programmes promotes student-centred learning, encourages wider student participation, and produces more in-depth and reasoned discussions than traditional face-to-face programmes (eg, Karayan amp; Crowe, 1997; Smith amp; Hardaker, 2000).

Further studies also provide evidence to support the benefits of online collaborative environments. For example, online discussions encourage more reticent individuals to participate to a greater extent (Citera, 1988). Furthermore, Warschauer (1997) advocates interaction in online environments; as here, there is less opportunity for intimidation between individuals and also less time pressure on them than in face-to-face settings.

Conversely, lack of close interaction between learners may have adverse consequences, possibly because learners experience feelings of isolation. Indeed, such a finding was reported by Haythornthwaite, Kazmer, Robbins and Shoemaker (2000), who suggested that the participants in their study who failed to make online connections with other learners in their group reported feeling isolated and more stressed than those who made such connections.

One reason for the importance of online interaction is because learners experience alsquo;sense of communityrsquo; (Rovai, 2002), enjoying mutual interdependence and a sense of trust and interaction among community members, which means that the members of the community have shared goals and values.

There is therefore much research that reports on the beneficial effects of online participation in terms of widening student involvement, improving the quality of discussions compared with traditional face-to-face interactions, as well as research on the beneficial effects of online interaction in terms of fostering an online community.

However, what needs to be investigated is whether online interaction has any tangible benefits in terms of improving student learning as measured by final grades on a course. The current study, therefore, examines the level of online participation of 122 under-graduates during their 1st year of a business degree, comparing the level of interaction with their grades at the end of the year.

Method

Participants

The performance and online engagement of 122 students (70 male, 52 female) were examined for each module taken during their 1st year of study. All students were enrolled in a business degree course. Ninety-seven students were studying full-time taking six modules, and 25 students were studying part-time taking three modules.

Procedure

The participants used the lsquo;blackboardrsquo; environment for a period of 12 months, and their usage of this was compared with their level-one grades.

The lsquo;blackboardrsquo; statistics was recorded for each student in four main areas of thelsquo;blackboardrsquo; environment: communication, main content, student, and group areas.

Data analysis

There are two routes through which the virtual classroom and discussion boards may be accessed, either through the group or the communication areas. Therefore, for the purpose of this analysis, the studentsrsquo; access to the group area and their access to the communication areas were combined and used to represent the degree of participation in online discussion. Access to the main content area and access to the student area were also combined and used to represent the lsquo;blackboardrsquo; activity without participating in group discussions.

The proportion of the total lsquo;blackboardrsquo; hits, which relates to communication/group access, was calculated for each student for each module. This proportion was compared with the year-1 module grade. If online participation in discussion forums is an effective learning aid, then it is expected that those students who proportionately spend more time in communication/group areas should achieve better module grades.

To aid analysis, the students were allocated to groups based on the grades achieved per module. The number of students in each group by module is shown in Table 1.

Results

A Kruskal–Wallis test was performed on the differences in overall lsquo;blackboardrsquo; usage, for each grade grouping. Differences in the mean rank scores are shown in Table 2.

Intuitively, it makes sense that the more active a student is, the better he or she will perform, and this is born out by the consistent and significant pattern of results obtained. In general, the mean ranks increased across the grade bands with people in the high-pass and medium-pass bands showing greater activity in terms of the number of times they accessed lsquo;blackboardrsquo; than students with low passing grades. Not surprisingly, the students who failed also consistently ranked lowest in terms of lsquo;blackboardrsquo; activity. This suggests that greater activity, as measured by lsquo;blackboardrsquo; usage, is likely to lead to a better performance in terms of module grade.

剩余内容已隐藏，支付完成后下载完整资料

资料编号：[269336]，资料为PDF文档或Word文档，PDF文档可免费转换为Word