Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorCeluch, Kevin
dc.contributor.authorMilewicz, Chad
dc.contributor.authorSaxby, Carl
dc.date.accessioned2020-01-31T21:50:07Z
dc.date.available2020-01-31T21:50:07Z
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12419/486
dc.descriptionPresentation. 3rd Celebration of Teaching & Learning Symposium, February 6, 2019, the University of Southern Indiana
dc.description
dc.description.abstractTopic/Problem statement:  A host of literature points to the significance of active/collaborative learning as a means of enhancing student engagement and subsequent learning.  Recently, questions have been raised as to the efficacy of the approach for different learning contexts (face-to-face versus online).  The present research explores the following question: how does class delivery mode influence the efficacy of active/collaborative learning?  Specifically, we examine perceived differences across delivery modes as well as if the effect of class delivery mode works through (is mediated by) perceived student-faculty interaction to influence student mastery goal orientation. Context:  Students completed a questionnaire related to their perceptions of the classes and their learning at the end of four classes: two sections of a marketing principles introductory class (one face-to-face and one online) taught by the same instructor using the same class assignments; and two sections of a marketing management capstone class (one face-to-face and one online) taught by the same instructor using the same class assignments. Approach:  Note that we controlled for instructor, assignments, and level of classes.  The literature often critiques comparisons of face-to-face versus online class formats for a failure to control such factors.   This research also measures important student process perceptions identified in the teaching and learning literature which have been tied to the effectiveness of active/collaborative approaches.  These included: perceived student-faculty interaction which assesses instructor provision of feedback and facilitation of discussion (adopted from Carini, Kuh, and Klein 2006); mastery goal orientation which assesses the extent of emphasis on understanding rather than memorizing content, enjoyment of learning, and performance improvement (adapted from Anderman and Midgley 2002; Church, Elliot, and Gable 2001); and perceived student engagement which assesses student perceptions of the class learning environment (adopted from Church, Elliot, and Gable 2001).  Reflection/Discussion:  Significant differences between the face-to-face and online delivery mode were observed with face-to-face classes having stronger perceived student-faculty interaction and mastery goal orientation than online formats.  Interestingly, both delivery modes were equally engaging.  Further, class delivery mode (face-to-face versus online) was a significant predictor of perceived student-faculty interaction.  Lastly, delivery mode was found to work through student-faculty interaction to influence student mastery goal orientation.  These findings hold implications for adapting and strengthening active/collaborative learning to online delivery.  Specifically, there is a need to explore at a more nuanced level how the perception of student-faculty interaction can be enhanced for online delivery to positively influence student mastery goal orientation which has been tied to deeper, longer lasting learning.  References Anderman, E.M. and Midgley, C. (2002), “Methods for studing goals, goal structures, and patterns of adaptive learning”, in Goals, Goal Structures, and Patterns of Adaptive Learning, ed. C. Midgley, pp. 1-53.Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ. Carini, R.M., Kuh, G.D. and Klein, S.P. (2006), “Student engagement and student learning: Testing the linkages”, Research in Higher Education, Vol. 47 No. 1, 1-32. Church, M.A., Elliot, A.J. and Gable, S.L. (2001), “Perceptions of classroom environment, achievement goals, and achievement outcomes”, Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol.93 No. 1, 43-54.
dc.subjectclass delivery mode
dc.subjectstudent-faculty interaction
dc.subjectmastery goal orientation
dc.titleThe impact of class delivery mode on student-faculty interaction and mastery goal orientation
html.description.abstract<p><strong>Topic/Problem statement:</strong>&nbsp; A host of literature points to the significance of active/collaborative learning as a means of enhancing student engagement and subsequent learning.&nbsp; Recently, questions have been raised as to the efficacy of the approach for different learning contexts (face-to-face versus online).&nbsp; The present research explores the following question: how does class delivery mode influence the efficacy of active/collaborative learning?&nbsp; Specifically, we examine perceived differences across delivery modes as well as if the effect of class delivery mode works through (is mediated by) perceived student-faculty interaction to influence student mastery goal orientation.</p> <p><strong>Context:</strong>&nbsp; Students completed a questionnaire related to their perceptions of the classes and their learning at the end of four classes: two sections of a marketing principles introductory class (one face-to-face and one online) taught by the same instructor using the same class assignments; and two sections of a marketing management capstone class (one face-to-face and one online) taught by the same instructor using the same class assignments.</p> <p><strong>Approach:</strong>&nbsp; Note that we controlled for instructor, assignments, and level of classes.&nbsp; The literature often critiques comparisons of face-to-face versus online class formats for a failure to control such factors.&nbsp;&nbsp; This research also measures important student process perceptions identified in the teaching and learning literature which have been tied to the effectiveness of active/collaborative approaches.&nbsp; These included: <em>perceived student-faculty interaction </em>which assesses instructor provision of feedback and facilitation of discussion (adopted from Carini, Kuh, and Klein 2006); <em>mastery goal orientation </em>which assesses the extent of emphasis on understanding rather than memorizing content, enjoyment of learning, and performance improvement (adapted from Anderman and Midgley 2002; Church, Elliot, and Gable 2001); and <em>perceived student engagement</em> which assesses student perceptions of the class learning environment (adopted from Church, Elliot, and Gable 2001).&nbsp;</p> <p><strong>Reflection/Discussion:</strong>&nbsp; Significant differences between the face-to-face and online delivery mode were observed with face-to-face classes having stronger perceived student-faculty interaction and mastery goal orientation than online formats.&nbsp; Interestingly, both delivery modes were equally engaging.&nbsp; Further, class delivery mode (face-to-face versus online) was a significant predictor of perceived student-faculty interaction.&nbsp; Lastly, delivery mode was found to work through student-faculty interaction to influence student mastery goal orientation.&nbsp; These findings hold implications for adapting and strengthening active/collaborative learning to online delivery.&nbsp; Specifically, there is a need to explore at a more nuanced level how the perception of student-faculty interaction can be enhanced for online delivery to positively influence student mastery goal orientation which has been tied to deeper, longer lasting learning.&nbsp;</p> <p><strong>References</strong></p> <p style="margin-top: 0.0in; margin-right: 0.0in; margin-left: 0.5in; text-indent: -0.5in;">Anderman, E.M. and Midgley, C. (2002), &ldquo;Methods for studing goals, goal structures, and patterns of adaptive learning&rdquo;, in <em>Goals, Goal Structures, and Patterns of Adaptive Learning</em>, ed. C. Midgley, pp. 1-53.Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ.</p> <p style="margin-top: 0.0in; margin-right: 0.0in; margin-left: 0.5in; text-indent: -0.5in;">Carini, R.M., Kuh, G.D. and Klein, S.P. (2006), &ldquo;Student engagement and student learning: Testing the linkages&rdquo;, <em>Research in Higher Education</em>, Vol. 47 No. 1, 1-32.</p> <p style="margin-top: 0.0in; margin-right: 0.0in; margin-left: 0.5in; text-indent: -0.5in;">Church, M.A., Elliot, A.J. and Gable, S.L. (2001), &ldquo;Perceptions of classroom environment, achievement goals, and achievement outcomes&rdquo;, <em>Journal of Educational Psychology</em>, Vol.93 No. 1, 43-54.</p>
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversity of Southern Indiana


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record