Gender Differences in Online High School Courses
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v20i4.1049Keywords:
online learning, LMS research, gender differencesAbstract
Prior research has suggested that there may be differences in the ways that male and female students approach their online courses. Using data for 802 high school students enrolled in 14 online courses, this study explored gender differences in the interrelationships among online behaviors and course performance. The findings show that females were more active than males and that a higher degree of online activity and discussion forum viewing and posting was associated with better final grades, but the correlation was stronger for males than it was for females. Further exploration of posting behaviors revealed that females who received lower final grades were more active than males who received lower grades—they viewed more posts, wrote more posts, and wrote longer posts. These gender differences have implications for researchers, course providers, and course designers.References
Anderson, T. (2003). Getting the mix right again: An updated and theoretical rationale for interaction. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 4(2). http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/149/230
Arbaugh, J. B. (2000). An exploratory study of the effects of gender on student learning and class participation in an Internet-based MBA course. Management Learning, 31(4), 503–519. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1177/1350507600314006
Chapman, E. (2003). Alternative approaches to assessing student engagement rates. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 8(13). http://PAREonline.net/getvn.asp?v=8&n=13
Cho, M. H., & Kim, B. J. (2013). Students’ self-regulation for interaction with others in online learning environments. The Internet and Higher Education, 17, 69–75. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2012.11.001
Davies, J., & Graff, M. (2005). Performance in e-learning: Online participation and student grades. British Journal of Educational Technology, 35(4), 657–663. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2005.00542.x
Dawson, S., McWilliam, E., & Tan, J. (2008). Teaching smarter: How mining ICT data can inform and improve learning and teaching practice. Hello! Where are you in the landscape of educational technology? Proceedings ASCILITE Melbourne 2008 (pp. 221–230). http://www.ascilite.org/conferences/melbourne08/procs/dawson.pdf
Hung, J.-L., & Zhang, K. (2008). Revealing online learning behaviors and activity patterns and making predictions with data mining techniques in online teaching. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 4(4), 426–437. http://jolt.merlot.org/vol4no4/hung_1208.pdf
Hung, J., Hsu, Y., & Rice, K. (2012). Integrating data mining in program evaluation of K–12 online education. Educational Technology & Society, 15(3), 27–41. http://www.ifets.info/journals/15_3/3.pdf
iNACOL (International Association for K–12 Online Learning). (2013). Fast facts about online learning. Vienna, VA: International Association for Online Learning. http://www.inacol.org/resource/fast-facts-about-online-learning/
Johnson, R. D. (2011). Gender differences in e-learning: Communication, social presence, and learning outcomes. Journal of Organization and End User Computing, 23(1), 79–94. http://dx.doi.org/10.4018/joeuc.2011010105
Jonassen, D. H. (1999). Designing constructivist learning environments. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (Vol. II, pp. 215–39). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Liu, F., & Cavanaugh, C. (2011a). High enrollment course success factors in virtual school: Factors influencing student academic achievement. International Journal on E-Learning, 10(4), 393–418. https://www.learntechlib.org/p/33040/article_33040.pdf
Liu, F., & Cavanaugh, C. (2011b). Success in online high school Biology: Factors influencing student academic performance. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 12(1), 37–54. https://rtsdettf.wikispaces.com/file/view/onlineHSBio.pdf
Liu, F., & Cavanaugh, C. (2012). Factors influencing student academic performance in online high school Algebra. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 27(2), 149–167. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02680513.2012.678613
Lowes, S. (2014). A brief look at the methodologies used in researching online teaching and learning. In R. E. Ferdig & K. Kennedy (Eds.), Handbook of research on K–12 online and blended learning (pp. 83–104). Pittsburgh, PA: ETC Press.
Lowes, S., & Lin, P. (2015). Learning to learn online: Using locus of control to help students become successful online learners. Journal of Online Learning Research, 1(1), 17-48. https://www.learntechlib.org/d/149845
Lowes, S., Lin, P., & Kinghorn, B. (2015). Exploring the link between online behaviours and course performance in asynchronous online high school courses. Journal of Learning Analytics, 2(2), 169–194. http://dx.doi.org/10.18608/jla.2015.22.13
Macfadyen, L. P., & Dawson, S. (2010). Mining LMS data to develop an “early warning system” for educators: A proof of concept. Computers & Education, 54(2), 588–599. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.09.008
McSporran, M., & Young, S. (2001). Does gender matter in online learning? Research in Learning Technology, 9(2), 3–15.
Morris, L. V., Finnegan, C., & Wu, S-S. (2005). Tracking student behavior, persistence, and achievement in online courses. Internet and Higher Education, 8, 221–231.
Muthén, L. K. (2005, November 27). Negative Residual Variance [Msg 4]. Message posted to http://www.statmodel2.com/discussion/messages/11/555.html?1358188287.
Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998-2015). Mplus User’s Guide. Seventh Edition. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
https://www.statmodel.com/download/usersguide/Mplus%20user%20guide%20Ver_7_r3_web.pdf
Ramos, C., & Yudko, E. (2008). “Hits” (not “Discussion Posts”) predict student success in online courses: A double cross-validation study. Computers & Education, 50(4), 1174–1182. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2006.11.003
Rovai, A. P. (2001). Building classroom community at a distance: A case study. Educational Technology Research and Development, 49(4), 33–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02504946
Ryabov, I. (2012). The effect of time online on grades in online sociology courses. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 8(1), 13–23. http://jolt.merlot.org/vol8no1/ryabov_0312.htm
Tsai, M.-J., Liang, J.-C., Hou, H.-T., & Tsai, C.-C. (2015). Males are not as active as females in online discussion: Gender differences in face-to-face and online discussion strategies. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 31(3), 263-277. http://ajet.org.au/index.php/AJET/article/view/1557/1278
Wang, A. Y., & Newlin, M. H. (2000). Characteristics of students who enroll and succeed in psychology web-based classes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(1), 137–143.
Watson, J., Pape, L., Gemin, B., & Vashaw, L. (2015). Keeping pace with K–12 digital learning. Durango, CO: Evergreen Educational Group. http://www.inacol.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Keeping-Pace-2015-Report.pdf
Wei, H.-C., Peng, C., & Chou, C. (2015). Can more interactivity improve learning achievement in an online course? Effects of college students’ perception and actual use of a course-management system on their learning achievement. Computers & Education, 83, 10–21. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.12.013
Yukselturk, E., & Bulut, S. (2009). Gender differences in self-regulated online learning environments. Educational Technology & Society, 12(3), 12–22. http://www.ifets.info/journals/12_3/3.pdf
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
As a condition of publication, the author agrees to apply the Creative Commons – Attribution International 4.0 (CC-BY) License to OLJ articles. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
This licence allows anyone to reproduce OLJ articles at no cost and without further permission as long as they attribute the author and the journal. This permission includes printing, sharing and other forms of distribution.
Author(s) hold copyright in their work, and retain publishing rights without restrictions
