Community college enrollments are growing more than any other area of higher education. As the overall enrollments surge, the number of students who are required to take developmental math courses is also increasing. With no physical space to hold more classes, offering developmental classes in online and hybrid formats is the only way to meet the growth. Presently no research looks at whether these students can be successful in online learning environments. Taking such a course in online or hybrid environments may produce a greater difficulty for developmental students that were already challenged by the content. Evidence needs to be provided to ensure that the learning environment does not have a negative impact on success.
In order to determine student success in the different learning environments as well as any traits associated with the successful student, the research was guided by the following questions: (1) Are three different learning environments (face-to-face, hybrid, fully online) equally effective as measured by course grades? (2) Which external characteristics (e.g. gender, age, ethnicity) are significant in determining student success in each of the three learning environments? (3) Which internal characteristics (e.g. learning style, motivation) are significant in determining student success in each of the three learning environments?
The Intermediate Algebra course was designed based on the Cognitive Load Theory. Student success is dependent on good instructional design, so this was the basis for the course. The Cognitive Load Theory (CLT) addresses the limitations on learning, retention, and transfer. The theory states that there are two parts of memory, working memory which is where new information is processed and long term memory where information is organized and stored for later use. Working memory is limited and yet it includes processing capabilities as well as the work with new information. In the working memory, information is organized into schemas which can then be stored in long-term memory for future retrieval. Without enough space in working memory, the information cannot be transferred over to long-term memory, so it will not be retained. The material in the course was broken down into units and then into smaller objectives that were small enough to be presented in less than ten minutes. Additional examples were provided for the students that needed them, but more experienced students were not required to complete them. New material was connected to previously learned skills so that the cognitive load was decreased.
The course design, lessons, examples, tests, syllabus, and final exam were the same for all three learning environments. The test and final exam scores, and overall course grade were used to determine if there was a difference in student success based on the learning environment. Success was measured as a grade of 70 or better for the course since that allows the student to register for a college-level math course. Students also completed three survey instruments: Rotter's Locus of Control, the Visual, Auditory, Reading/Writing, Kinesthetic Learning Preference Inventory (VARK), and the Technology and Internet Assessment (TIA). Demographic data was collected from the college. The sample was 167 students with an average age of 25 years, 58% were female, 49% were Caucasian and 43% were African-American.
When evaluating the scores earned on unit tests, final exam, and the overall average, results of one-way ANOVA revealed that there was a significant difference for the final exam, the overall average, and four of the seven unit tests. For all of the tests, the final exam, and the overall average, the hybrid students had the lowest mean score. Using the course average, there is a statistically significant difference based on the learning environment, with the hybrid being the lowest score. However, attrition is an issue with developmental students and online students, so further analysis was completed. Looking over the entire number of unit test grades as well as the final exams in each learning environment, there were some that were not completed: 5% of the face-to-face scores, 23% of the blended scores, and 18% of the online scores. This means that the blended students had the lowest average, but also the largest number of zero grades.
Removing the zero grades and re-analyzing the data, changed the results so that the final exam scores were no longer significantly different. For all of the other scores, there were statistically significant differences based on the learning environment, but the hybrid course was no longer the lowest average. For four of the unit tests plus the course average, the face-to-face students had the lowest average. The impact of removing the zero grades changed the learning environment with the lowest course average from the hybrid to the face-to-face environment. It also changed the highest course average from the face-to-face to the online environment.
For the student characteristics, many showed no significant difference between the students that were successful and those that were not successful, specifically in terms of age, gender, ethnicity, registration time, full- or part-time status, or locus of control. Within the face-to-face environment, students that were new to the college were significantly more likely to be successful than returning students, students with a strong Visual learning preference were more likely to be unsuccessful, and students with a high Use of Technology score were more likely to be unsuccessful. In the blended learning environment, students with a strong Reading/Writing learning preference were more likely to not pass the course, and students with a high score on the Specific Computer Skills subscale were more likely to be unsuccessful. Within the online learning environment, there was no significant difference in success based on learning style or technology skills.
Both developmental and online students have retention issues. As expected online developmental students have an even lower completion rate. This research shows for the students that complete the course, the distance learning environments have better success rates than the traditional face-to-face course. Concerns about learning styles and technology skills impacting success for online students are unfounded based on this research.
