QUESTIONING THE HYBRID MODEL: STUDENT OUTCOMES IN DIFFERENT COURSE FORMATS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v9i1.1804Keywords:
hybrid, student outcomes, course format, distance education, internetAbstract
Current literature suggests that a hybrid model of distance education supports student learning more effectively than any other format. It also seems likely that the hybrid format can be used in most courses. The purpose of our study was to examine the strength of these assertions. This study examined the outcomes of two introductory courses in teacher education and health services employing similar pedagogical methods within three delivery formats (face-to-face, internet-based, and hybrid) in an effort to compare each of these modes of instruction. Results demonstrate that significant differences exist among the various formats and that the internet-based format could possibly lead to better student outcomes compared to face-to-face and hybrid formats.
References
Waits, T., and L. Lewis. NCES Report, Distance Education at Degree-Granting Post-Secondary Institutions; 2000–2001 (2003). Available online: http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2003017.
Sikora, A. NCES Report, A Profile of Participation in Distance Education: 1999–2000 (2002). Available online: http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2003154.
National Education Association. Confronting the future of distance learning—placing quality in reach, 2000. Available online: http://www.nea.org/nr/nr000614.html.
Young, J. ‘Hybrid’ Teaching Seeks to End the Divide Between Traditional and Online Instruction. Chronicle for Higher Education 48(28): A33, 2002.
Burton, L., and D. Goldsmith. Experience in Online Courses: A Study Using Asynchronous Online Learning Focus Groups, 2003. Available online: http://www.ctdlc.org/Evaluation/StudentExperience.pdf.
DeVries, J. and G. Lim. Significance of Online Teaching vs. Face-to-face: Similarities and Differences, 2003. Available online: http://ole.tp.edu.sg/courseware/teaching_guide/resources/article/TP%20Staff/F2FandOnline.pdf.
Frydenberg, J. Quality Standards in E-learning: A Matrix of Analysis. International Review in Open and Distance Learning, October 2002. Available online: http://www.irrodl.org/content/v3.2/frydenberg.html.
Johnson, S.D. et al. Comparative Analysis of Learner Satisfaction and Learning Outcomes in Online and Face-to-ace Learning Environments. Journal of Interactive Learning Research 11(1): 29–49, 2000.
Stacey, E. and M. Rice. Evaluating an Online Learning Environment. Australian Journal of Educational Technology 18(3): 323–340, 2002. Available online: http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet18/stacey.html.
Carnevale, D. Online Students Don’t Fare as Well as Classroom Counterparts, Study Finds. Chronicle for Higher Education 48(27): A38, 2002.
Brown, B. and C. Liedholm. Can Web Courses Replace the Classroom in Principles of Microeconomics? American Economic Review 92(2): 444–448, May 2002.
Koory, M. Differences in Learning Outcomes for the Online and F2F Versions of “An Introduction to Shakespeare.” Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 7(2): July 2003. Available online: http://www.sloan-c.org/publications/jaln/v7n2/v7n2_koory.asp.
Maki, R., W. Maki, M. Patterson, and P. Whittaker. Evaluation of a Web-based Introductory Psychology Course: I. Learning and Satisfaction in On-line versus Lecture Courses. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers 32: 230–39, 2000.
Rivera, J., M. McAlister, and M. Rice. A Comparison of Student Outcomes and Satisfaction between Traditional and Web Based Course Offerings. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration 5(3): 2002. Available online: http://www.westga.edu/%7Edistance/ojdla/fall53/rivera53.html.
McDonald, J. Is “As Good as Face-to-Face” As Good as It Gets? Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 6(2): August 2002. Available online: http://www.sloan-c.org/publications/jaln/v6n2/v6n2_macdonald.asp.
Stith, B. Web-Enhanced Lecture Course Scores Big with Students and Faculty. THE Journal 27(8): March 2000.
Twigg, C. Innovations in Online Learning: Moving beyond No Significant Difference. Center for Academic Transformation, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, 2001. Available online: http://www.center.rpi.edu/PewSym/Mono4.html.
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
