1 / 29

UCF’s Distributed Learning Impact Evaluation

A comprehensive evaluation of UCF's distributed learning programs, analyzing the impact on faculty and students. Includes demographics, retention rates, satisfaction levels, and generational comparisons.

dianneturner
Download Presentation

UCF’s Distributed Learning Impact Evaluation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. UCF’s Distributed LearningImpact Evaluation Charles D. Dziuban Patsy D. Moskal University of Central Florida

  2. The University of Central Florida

  3. UCF’s top down and bottom up approach E M W Institutional Initiative Faculty Initiative

  4. UCF Distributed Learning support units • Center for Distributed Learning • Course Development & Web Services • Research Initiative for Teaching Effectiveness • Faculty Center for Teaching and Learning • Computer Services • Instructional Resources • Telecommunications

  5. Levels of faculty development IDL 6543 Mixed-mode course to design, develop, & deliver fully online or blended course ADL 5000 Online course modeling delivering existing fully online or blended course Essentials Online course for faculty who want to supplement their F2F course without reducing any class time.

  6. Principles that guide our evaluation Evaluation must be objective. Evaluation should conform to the culture of the institution. Uncollected data cannot be analyzed. Data do not equal information. Qualitative and quantitative approaches must complement each other. We must show an institutional impact. Our results may not be generalized beyond UCF.

  7. Distributed Learning Impact Evaluation Faculty Students Online programs Success Writing project model Satisfaction Demographic profiles Retention Higher order evaluation models Reactive behavior patterns Strategies for success Theater Student evaluation of instruction Information fluency Generational comparisons Large online classes

  8. Student Results

  9. Overall success rates by modality Blended (N= 34,102) (N= 72,067) Fully Online Percent

  10. Overall withdrawal rates by modality Blended (N= 32,859) Fully Online (N= 84,961) Percent

  11. Student satisfaction in fully online and mixed-mode courses Fully online (N = 1,173) Blended (N = 867) Unsatisfied Very Satisfied Very Unsatisfied Satisfied Neutral

  12. Very satisfied students by experience with fully online or blended courses Fully online (N = 594) Blended (N = 365) 62% 49% 46% 43% 42% 39% Novices 1-2 courses Persistors 3-4 courses Experienced Users 5-6 courses

  13. Students who feel that online courses make their lives more flexible (N = 1,311) 51% 37% 10% 2% 1% Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Neutral

  14. Students who feel that online courses make their lives more convenient (N = 1,294) 50% 34% 13% 2% 1% Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Neutral

  15. A segment model for success Overall 85.9% n=11,286 Arts & Sciences, Business Admin., Hospitality Mgmt. Health & Pub. Affairs Engineering Education 85.8% n=6,460 72.7% n=378 91.5% n=2,079 86.7% n=2,369 F2F, E, M W F2F E, M, W F2F E, M 89.1% n=1,043 79.6% n=230 94.1% n=1,036 64.7% n=148 74.8% n=821 86.5% n=5,639 females males A&S BA & Hosp. mgmt 84.1% n=2,376 78.5% n=526 88.4% n=3,263 68.9% n=298

  16. Students’ positive perceptions about blended learning • Convenience • Reduced Logistic Demands • Increased Learning Flexibility • Technology Enhanced Learning Reduced Opportunity Costs for Education

  17. Students’ less positive perceptions about blended learning • Reduced Face-to-Face Time • Technology Problems • Reduced Instructor Assistance • Overwhelming • Increased Workload Increased Opportunity Costs for Education

  18. Student Generations

  19. Matures (prior to 1946) Dedicated to a job they take on Respectful of authority Place duty before pleasure Baby boomers (1946-1964) Live to work Generally optimistic Have influenced policy & products Some characteristics of the generations • Generation X (1965-1980) • Work to live • Clear & consistent expectations • Value contributing to the whole • Millennials (1981-1994) • Live in the moment • Expect immediacy of technology • Question everything

  20. Students who were very satisfied with blended learning by generation 57% 41% 33% Percent (N=473)

  21. Changed approach to learning by generation 50% 38% Percent 20% (N=473)

  22. Success in Blended Courses by Gender and Generational Membership Success (N=18,732) 93% Male (N=6,548) 90% Female (N=12,184) 94% Mature-Boomer (N=1,800) 98% Gen-X (N=6,431) 95% Mature-Boomer (N=5,521) 95% Gen-X (N=3,809) 92% Millennials (N=2,182) 83% Millennials (N=3,913) 90%

  23. Faculty Results

  24. Time to develop course as compared with a comparable face-to-face section A lot more time More work A little more time 52% 77% About the same A little less time A lot less time 43% 21% Equal to or less than 5% 2% W n=56 M N=43 Modality

  25. Time in weekly course administration activities as compared with a comparable face-to-face section A lot more time 43% More work A little more time 60% About the same A little less time 38% 20% A lot less time 15% 19% Equal to or less than 2% 4% W n=55 M N=42 Modality

  26. Amount of interaction in Web classes compared to comparable F2F sections Increased Somewhat increased 45% More interaction 62% About the same Somewhat decreased 30% Decreased 16% Equal to or less than 13% 15% 8% 2% 3% 7% W n=55 M N=40 Modality

  27. Quality of interaction in Web classes compared to comparable F2F sections Increased Somewhat increased About the same 30% 35% Better interaction Somewhat decreased Decreased 37% 33% Equal to or less than 22% 19% 9% 14% 2% W n=55 M N=43 Modality

  28. Faculty willingness to teach Web courses in the future Definitely Probably Probably not Definitely not Positive 81% 69% 16% 13% Neutral or negative 2% 10% 4% 6% W n=71 M N=53 Modality

  29. UCF’s Research Initiative for Teaching Effectiveness For more information contact: Dr. Chuck Dziuban (407) 823-5478 dziuban@mail.ucf.edu Dr. Patsy Moskal (407) 823-0283 pdmoskal@mail.ucf.edu http://rite.ucf.edu

More Related