View
215
Download
0
Category
Tags:
Preview:
Citation preview
THE IMPACT OF STUDENT PROGRESS FACTORS ON STUDENT PERSISTENCE IN E-LEARNING
Anna H. Lint
TUI University(Trident University International)
February 03, 2011
2/03/2011
2
AGENDA
AbstractIntroductionProblem Statement & Research Questions Literature ReviewResearch MethodologyData Analysis & Presentation of ResultsDiscussion & Implications of the Research
2/03/2010
3
ABSTRACT
The Purpose of the study : To evaluate and test the theoretical underpinnings of the Kember’s (1995)
student progress model that examines the direct or indirect effects of student persistence in e-learning.
Research Methodology * Sample population: 169 students at HCC * Instrument: DESP & SOAP / * Analysis: Logistic & Multiple Regression
Findings & Limitations * Significance: external attribution (Q13, AdQ13 /w CVs: Q13, AdQ13, Q14),
academic incompatibility (Q13) academic integration (Q14); GPA (partial mediation
effect) * Limitations: local cc, individual perception
2/03/2011
4
INTRODUCTION The knowledge gap
Student attrition theories: Spady (1971) Tinto (1975) Bean & Metzner (1985) Kember (1989) Kember (1995)
Kember’s (1995) student progress model predates the proliferation of online courses that occurred after the mid 1990s. Whether the Kember model fits with the current e-learning in a community college.
The significance of the study Student persistence is a critical issue in e-learning Relationships among student perceptions, learning styles, and
student persistence Application of Kember’s 1995 model to e-learning retention Future use for increasing student persistence.
2/03/2011
5
PROBLEM STATEMENT
Dropout: 20 to 50 % of online students Online retention rate: 10 to 20 % lower than traditional class settings
Kember (1995) student progress modelDeveloped for distance education which was the early stage of
internet e-learning environmentLack of the association of student performance, cost-benefit analysis,
and student persistence
Measuring college student retention is complicated, confusing, and context dependentEvaluate direct or indirect effect among variables concerning student
persistence (Student progress factors, learning styles, student persistence)
Mixed results of Kember model
2/03/2011
6
RESEARCH QUESTIONS
1. Is there a statistically significant relationship between student perceptions
of the academic experience (a) social integration, (b) academic integration, (c) external attribution, and (d) academic incompatibility with student persistence (within the online learning environment at the community college level)? Does the relationship statistically significantly vary with respect to student characteristics and learning style?
2. Is there a statistically significant relationship between student perceptions of the academic experience (a) social integration, (b) academic integration, (c) external attribution, and (d) academic incompatibility with student persistence mediated by student performance (GPA)?
3. Is there a statistically significant relationship between student perceptions of the academic experience (a) social integration, (b) academic integration, (c) external attribution, and (d) academic incompatibility with student persistence mediated by cost-benefits?
2/03/2011
7
LITERATURE REVIEW
Persistence in E-learning The relationship among the components of Kember’s
model: social and academic integration, external attribution, and academic incompatibility and their influence on persistence
The contributions of student characteristics and learning styles to persistence
The relationship between GPA and persistence Student cost-benefit analysis with persistence
2/03/2011
8
THEORETICAL ORIENTATION & CONCEPTUAL FRAME WORK
Figure 1. A model of student progress (Kember, 1995, p. 55)
2/03/2011
Permission granted by Copyright Clearance Center , 03/13/2010
social integration
entry characteristics
external attribution
academic incompatibility
academic integration
GPA outcomecost/benefit
9
THEORETICAL ORIENTATION & CONCEPTUAL FRAME WORK (Cont.)
Figure 2. Conceptual Framework
2/03/2011
DVPersistence
IVs(Student Perceptions)
Social integration
Academic integration
External Attribution
Academic incompatibility
Performance (GPA)
Cost-Benefit
CVsCharacteristics (Age, Gender, Delivery mode, Major, Work environment, Marital status, E-learning experience)
Learning Styles (VARK)
10
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Research DesignPost-positivist worldview: reflects the need to identify
and assess the causes that influence outcomes Quantitative research using survey/ sample
population/ data collection and analysis
Sampling and PopulationPopulation: 169 community college students (out of a
sample of 800), Maryland : 21.1% return rateSample size: minimum 97, α = .05 with a medium ES (f 2=.15), power (.80)
2/03/2011
11
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY (Cont.)
Data Collection Upon the IRB approval, web based cross-sectional survey with target
students of summer 2010 at a community college, MD Data log, removal of error data, exporting to Excel Filtering data against research questions, importing data to SPSS 16.0
Instrumentation Section I: Student Characteristics Section II: Student Performance, Cost-Benefit analysis, and Student
Persistence Student Online Academic Persistence (SOAP) inventory
(cost-benefit & intent to persist: reliability of .84 & .68) Section III: Student Perceptions
Distance Education Student Progress (DESP) inventory (reliability of social integration: 0.69, external attribution: 0.77, academic integration: 0.80, and academic incompatibility: 0.76)
2/03/2011
12
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY (Cont.)
Statistical AnalysisTable 1: Research questions, Variables, and Statistical Analysis
2/03/2011
Research Questions IVs/CVs/MVs DV Statistics
1.Is there a statistically Student Perceptions Student Descriptive significant relationship (social integration, Persistence statisticsbetween student perceptions academic integration, (items 13,of the academic experience external attribution, 14 & 16/ Logistic(a)social integration academic categorical regression (b)academic integration incompatibility) & continuous(c)external attribution, and data) Multiple(d)academic incompatibility Covariant: regressionwith student persistence Characteristics (within the online learning (age, gender, environment at the community delivery mode, college level?) Does the major, work relationship statistically environment. significantly vary with marital status respect to student e-learning experience) characteristics and Learning Styleslearning style? (VARK)
13
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY (Cont.)
Table 1. (Continued)
2/03/2011
2.Is there a statistically Student Perceptions Student Descriptive significant relationship (social integration, Persistence statisticsbetween student perceptions academic integration, (items 13,of the academic experience external attribution, 14 & 16/ Logistic(a)social integration academic categorical regression(b)academic integration incompatibility) & continuous(c)external attribution, and data) Multiple(d)academic incompatibility Mediator: regressionwith student persistence Student mediated by student Performance performance (GPA)? (measured by GPA)
14
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY (Cont.)
Table 1. (Continued)
2/03/2011
3.Is there a statistically Student Perceptions Student Descriptivesignificant relationship (social integration, Persistence statisticsbetween student perceptions academic integration, (items 13, of the academic experience external attribution, 14 & 16/ Logistic(a)social integration academic categorical regression(b)academic integration incompatibility) & continuous (c)external attribution, and data) Multiple(d)academic incompatibility Mediator: regressionwith student persistence Cost-benefits mediated by cost-benefits?
15
DATA ANALYSIS & PRESENTATION OF RESULTS
Descriptive Statistics : Sample: 169 students out of 800 (21.1% return rate), survey: 3 times
Student Characteristics Gender (F: 78.4%); Age (Over 23: 54.7%); Marital (S: 66.0%); Delivery Mode (O:
75.3%); Major: (S: 58.2%); Online Experience (Y: 56.2%); Work Environment (Static location: 84.4%)
Learning Style: V (42.6%); A (11.7%); R/W (30.2%); K (15.4%) GPA (M=3.0418, SD= .84562); Cost-benefits (M=3.0281, SD= .73098)
Student Persistence (Q13, Ad.Q13, & Q14) by Student PerceptionsTable 2. Mean scores of student persistence by student perceptions
2/03/2011
Q13 AdQ13 Q14
Social Int. 3.38 (SD: .061) 3.28 (SD: .063) 3.29 (SD: .109) Academic Int. 3.46 (SD: .045) 3.38 (SD: .047) 3.36 (SD: .090) External Att. 2.66 (SD: .051) 2.70 (SD: .052) 2.80 (SD: .094)Academic Inc. 2.95 (SD: .043) 2.94 (SD: .048) 2.95 (SD: .093)
16
DATA ANALYSIS & PRESENTATION OF RESULTS (Cont.)
Bivariate Analysis
Table 3. Correlation between Ivs, CVs, & MVs and Student Percistence (Q13, AdQ13, & Q14)
Note. *p<.05, **p< .01. Spearman correlation was used for dichotomous variables. Pearson correlation was used
for continuous variables.
2/03/2011
Q13 AdQ13 Q14
Social Int. .168 .012 -.201*Academic Int. .276** .150 .273**External Att. -.290* -.216* -.248** GPA .197* .236* .248**Cost-benefits -.036 -.078* .003Age -.175* -.075 -.132 On-experience .219** .159 .236**
17
DATA ANALYSIS & PRESENTATION OF RESULTS (Cont.)
Multivariate Analyses of Student Persistence
1. Research Question I Table 4. Regression Analysis Predicting the Variance of Student Perception,
Student characteristics, and Student Persistence
Note. OR was used for the probability of Q13 & AdQ13. β was used for the probability of Q14.
*p< .05, **p< .01.
2/03/2011
No control Control by CV Q13 / AdQ13 / Q14 (β) Q13 / AdQ13 / Q14 (β)
Academic Int. .269*External Att. .159** .213* .149* .135* -.768* Academic Inc. 3.796* Marital 13.124* On-experience 3.050* 3.472* .623*LS Auditory 15.196*
18
DATA ANALYSIS & PRESENTATION OF RESULTS (Cont.)2. Research Question II
Baron and Kenny (1986) four steps for mediation: IV+DV(1) - IV+MV(2) - IV+MV+DV (3&4)
Sobel test for checking the complete mediation. Partial mediation effect of GPA to the relationship between S. Perceptions & S.
Persistence
Table 5. Regression Analyses for Student Perceptions and Student Persistence Mediated by GPA
Note. Logistic regression was used for Q13 & AdQ13. Multiple regression analysis was used for Q14.
3. Research Question III No mediation effect of Cost-benefits to the relationship between S. Perceptions & S.
Persistence
2/03/2011
No Mediation Mediated by GPA Q13 / AdQ13 / Q14 Q13 / AdQ13 / Q14
Academic Int. .895* .720*External Att. -1.837** -1.545* -1.930** -1.884**Academic Inc. 1.334* 1.406* GPA .744** .871** .385**
19
DISCUSSION & IMPLICATIONS OF THE RESEARCH
Study Findings
External attribution had a significant relationship with Q13 & AdQ13.
External attribution had a significant relationship with Q13, AdQ13, &Q14 controlling with CVs.
Academic incompatibly had a significant relationship with Q13. Academic integration had a significant relationship with Q14. Prior online experience had a significant relationship with Q13
& Q14. Single & Auditory learners had a significant relationship with
AdQ13. A partial mediate effect of GPA and no mediate effect of Cost-
benefits for the relationship between student perception and student persistence 2/03/2011
20
DISCUSSION & IMPLICATIONS OF THE RESEARCH (Cont.)
Research Question I Hypothesis of RQ1 is partially accepted and rejected. External attribution decreased in the odds of intent to enroll by a factor of .159 for
Q13/ .213 for AdQ13; Academic incompatibility increased by a factor of 3.796 for Q13; Academic integration was statistically significant on Q14.
Prior online: Q13 & Q14; Single: Ad.Q13; Auditory: AdQ13// External attribution: Q13, AdQ13, & Q14
Discussion & Suggestions Kember model: The importance of Social & Academic integration in distance education In this study: External attribution (negative) is dominant The harm of social networking for student persistence: Kord (2008), Hewitt (2003) Suggestions: 1. E-learning institutions need to understand the trend of students
2. Reducing External attribution such as social networking by reinforcing college website (user friendly) and providing time management course for multiple obligations
3. Increasing Academic integration by course related feedback. 4. Tailored courses for the Academic incompatibility (Intensive, regular, extended
course) 5. Prior online experience/ auditory learning style
2/03/2011
21
DISCUSSION & IMPLICATIONS OF THE RESEARCH (Cont.)
Research Question II The hypothesis of mediate effect of GPA on the relationship between S.
Perceptions & S. Persistence was partially accepted. A partial mediation effect of GPA.
Discussion and Suggestions GPA & persistence: Woosely (2009), Davis (2010) Direct effect of GPA and partial mediate effect Based on the results of RQ I, GPA can be increased by the academic
feedback and encouragement. Allow students flexible time line to understand the content of the course
Research Question III The hypothesis of mediate effect of Cost-benefits on the relationship
between S. Perceptions & S. Persistence was accepted. No mediation effect of Cost-benefit.
Cost-benefits & persistence: Tinto (1975), Strevy (2009), Stuart (2010) Yet the significant relationship among academic integration, academic
incompatibility, and Cost-benefits.
2/03/2011
22
DISCUSSION & IMPLICATIONS OF THE RESEARCH (Cont.)
Implication & Conclusion
Kember (1995) included external attribution and academic incompatibility as a harmful factor
External attribution was significant to most scores of student persistence: 1) Reflecting the current stream of e-learning environment such as IT &
Social network, 2) Time management for multiple obligations of students
Academic incompatibility & Academic integration: Tailored due date, flexible coursework, feedback, & encouragement of student performance
GPA: Encouragement of student performance by increasing appropriate academic environment
Prior online experience, Single, & Auditory learning style
2/03/2011
23
DISCUSSION & IMPLICATIONS OF THE RESEARCH (Cont.)
Recommendations & Limitations Recommendations for future research
Sample pools from 100% e-learning institutions Administrator, faculty, and staff perspective for student persistence Examine and compare the tailored programs for student persistence: intensive,
regular, and extended Three scores of student persistence in this study: compare, develop, or elaborate
the definition of student persistence.
Limitations Non-random sample of students matriculating in online and hybrid courses Some students might select the online courses without original intention Learning style was self-assessed by participants The DESP inventory is mainly focused on student perceptions, thus the lack of
identifying the institution's e-learning environment The study may not be generalized to other e-learning students in other locations
or having other values for their education
2/03/2011
Recommended