logo logo International Journal of Educational Methodology

IJEM is a leading, peer-reviewed, open access, research journal that provides an online forum for studies in education, by and for scholars and practitioners, worldwide.

Subscribe to

Receive Email Alerts

for special events, calls for papers, and professional development opportunities.

Subscribe

Publisher (HQ)

RHAPSODE
Eurasian Society of Educational Research
College House, 2nd Floor 17 King Edwards Road, Ruislip, London, UK. HA4 7AE
RHAPSODE
Headquarters
College House, 2nd Floor 17 King Edwards Road, Ruislip, London, UK. HA4 7AE
hybrid teaching online teaching student demographics

How Different Student Demographics affect the Course Grades of the Different Teaching Modes for Hybrid Teaching Instructors Only

Douglas R. Moodie

Certain demographics of students may prefer certain modalities, and certain demographics may achieve higher mean grades in some teaching modalities th.


  • Pub. date: August 15, 2024
  • Online Pub. date: July 03, 2024
  • Pages: 495-516
  • 38 Downloads
  • 127 Views
  • 0 Citations
C

Certain demographics of students may prefer certain modalities, and certain demographics may achieve higher mean grades in some teaching modalities than others. This study used student-section data from five years of all the undergraduate courses at Kennesaw State University (KSU) from 2015 to 2019. This data set with individual student course outcomes included full student demographics and course types, including previous university grade point average (GPA), sex, age, ethnicity, course department, modality, etc. The study only used data from those instructors who taught hybrid sections, as well as in-person and online sections, to avoid the effect of instructor bias. Previous research found that instructors who taught hybrid sections gave higher grades for their online and F2F sections compared to those instructors who had not taught hybrid sections. The results showed that that hybrid-teaching instructors gave higher mean course grades for their hybrid sections than their online or F2F sections and higher mean course grades than non-hybrid teaching instructors in all modalities. This effect held for all demographics.  

Keywords: Hybrid teaching, online teaching, student demographics.

cloud_download PDF
Cite
Article Metrics
Views
38
Download
127
Citations
Crossref
0

References

Amparo, A. R., Smith, G., & Friedman, A. (2018). Gender and persistent grade performance differences between online and face-to-face undergraduate classes. In Proceedings from the June 2018 EdMedia+Innovate Learning Conference (pp. 1935-1939). EdMedia + Innovate Learning. https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/184430/

Amro, H. J., Mundy, M.-A., & Kupczynski, L. (2015). The effects of age and gender on student achievement in Face-to-Face and online college algebra classes. Research in Higher Education, 27, 1-22. https://www.learntechlib.org/p/160174/

Baum, S., & McPherson, M. (2019). The human factor: The promise & limits of online education. Daedalus, the Journal of the American Academy of Arts & Sciences, 148(4), 235-254. https://doi.org/10.1162/daed_a_01769

Biel, R., & Brams, C. J. (2016). Traditional versus online biology courses: Connecting course design and student learning in an online setting. Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education, 17(3), 417-422. https://doi.org/10.1128/jmbe.v17i3.1157

Blau, G., & Drennan, R. (2017). Exploring differences in business undergraduate perceptions by preferred classroom delivery modality. Online Learning, 21(3), 222-234. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v21i3.973

Blau, G., Gaffney, M. A., Scirmer, M., Ozkan, B., & Kim, Y. J. (2019). Exploring the relationship of background, technology, and motivation variables to business transfer intent for two mixed course modality business undergraduate samples. Online Learning, 23(1), 80-94. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v23i1.1416

Brau, M., Christian, S., Hill, B., McNair, D., Sandoz, S., & Taylor, C. (2010). Success and retention in online and hybrid courses. Lane Community College.

Cavanaugh, J., & Jacquemin, S. J. (2013). A large sample comparison of grade-based student learning outcomes in Online versus face-to-face courses. Online Learning, 19(2), Article 454. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v19i2.454

Kanetaki, Z., Stergiou, C., Bekas, G., Jacques, S., Troussas, C., Sgouropoulou, C., & Ouahabi, A. (2022). Grade prediction modeling in hybrid learning environments for sustainable engineering education, Sustainability, 14(9), Article 5205. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14095205

Kanetaki, Z., Stergiou, C. I., Bekas, G., Sgouropoulou, C., & Troussas, C. (2022). A hybrid machine learning model for grade prediction in online engineering education. International Journal of Engineering Pedagogy, 12(3), 4-22. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijep.v12i3.23873

Kim, D., & Krueger, T. M. (2017). Comparison of student success in hybrid and traditional introductory finance classes. Journal of Accounting & Finance, 17(5), 124-134. https://bit.ly/45RVpq9

Lovern, J. J. (2010). Is there a difference in student achievement based on the delivery method in an undergraduate assessment course: A comparison of face-to-face, hybrid, and online sections. In Proceedings of the June 2010 EdMedia+Innovate Learning Conference (pp. 2462-2467). EdMedia + Innovate Learning. https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/34984/

McFarlin, B. K. (2008). Hybrid lecture-online modality increases student grades in an undergraduate exercise physiology course at a large university. Advanced Physiological Education. 32(1), 86-91. https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00066.2007

Moodie, D. R. (2021). Comparing the outcomes of the different teaching modes: All-in-person, hybrid, and online, for different student demographic groups in a business school, Online Learning, 25(4), 362-387. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v25i4.2298

Moodie, D. R. (2022). A case study in how different teaching methods affect different student demographics across a university. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 23(2), 1-34.

Nguyen, T. (2015). The effectiveness of online learning: Beyond no significant difference and future horizons. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 11(3), 309-319. https://bit.ly/4bw5LND

Price, R. A., Arthur, T. Y., & Pauli, K. P. (2016). A comparison of factors affecting student performance and satisfaction in online, hybrid, and traditional courses. Business Education Innovation Journal, 8(2), 32-40. https://bit.ly/45Rdrcb

Reasons, S. G., Valadares, K., & Slavkin, M. (2005). Questioning the hybrid modality: Student outcomes in different course formats. Online Learning, 9(1), 83-94. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v9i1.1804

Senn, G. J. (2008). Comparison of face-to-face and hybrid delivery of a course that requires technology skills development. Journal of Information Technology Education, 7267-283. https://doi.org/10.28945/189

Son, J. Y., Narguizian, P., Beitz, D., & Desharnais, R. A. (2016). Comparing physical, virtual, and hybrid flipped labs for general education biology. Online Learning, 20(3), 228-243. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v20i3.687

Stern, B. S. (2004). A comparison of online and face-to-face instruction in an undergraduate foundations of American education course. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 4(2), 196-213. https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/19939/

Sun, A., & Chen, X. (2016). Online education and its effective practice: A research review. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 15, 157-190. https://doi.org/10.28945/3502

Xing, X., & Saghaian, S. (2022). Learning outcomes of a hybrid online virtual classroom and in-person traditional classroom during the COVID-19 pandemic, Sustainability, 14(9),  Article 5263. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14095263

Xu, D., & Jaggers, S. S. (2014). Performance gaps between online and face-to-face courses: Differences across types of students and academic subject areas. The Journal of Higher Education, 85(5), 633-659. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2014.11777343

 

...