Teaching in Cyberspace: Online vs.

¶ … Teaching in cyberspace: Online vs. traditional instruction using waiting-list experimental design" by C. Poirier and R. Feldman evaluated the performance and course ratings of students in an introductory psychology course, taking into account differences in the teaching modality of the course, traditional mode vs. online mode. The main hypotheses of the study are as follows: (1) there is a significant difference on the effectiveness on grades between traditional and online psychology students, and (2) there is a significant difference on the student evaluation ratings between traditional and online psychology students.

Setting/Location

This experiment was designed to assess student performance and evaluation ratings between two modes of teaching introductory psychology: traditional and online. Thus, one part of the experiment was set in the traditional classroom setting, while the other part of the experiment was set via the online teaching course. However, the evaluation of effectiveness on grades was assessed in one setting/location, wherein both traditional and online students took proctored examinations in the traditional classroom setting (i.e., not online).

Methods

Participants/Subjects: Included in the study were 23 University undergraduate students, chosen from a pool of volunteers. Each participant in the study was randomly assigned to the mode of instruction in which they will belong, i.e., whether online or traditional.

Instruments. Two primary instruments were used to determine and answer the study's hypotheses: the examination grades/results of the students, and their evaluation ratings of the course they have undertaken. Through the exam grades, the researchers were able to gauge whether online students achieved better grades than traditional students, or vice versa. Similarly, evaluation ratings determined which of the two groups had greater satisfaction of the course they took. Items specifically evaluated in the student evaluation include satisfaction with the instructor of the course, the level of interaction among students, and the amount of time spent on the course.

Design. The study's design was quasi-experimental, since it made use of a comparison group from which the traditional classroom learning setting was compared against. This comparison group was the online class, which has the same course objectives, materials, and assessment tools as the traditional class; only, their point of difference is the mode of teaching. Comparison of the effectiveness of the students' grades and evaluation ratings between the two groups -- traditional as the control group and online as the experimental group -- completed the experimental design of the study.

Internal Validity Threats.

History- Yes, because of the differences in the time period in which traditional and online classes are conducted. Can be remedied through determination of fixed time schedules for each day or class meeting.

Maturation- No, because both classes finished in the same time period, signified by the fact that both groups took their exams simultaneously and within one setting/location.

Testing- No, since utilization of the ANOVA within-subjects and between-subjects test was the most appropriate statistical test to be conducted for this type of study.

Instrumentation- Yes, because there are other more efficient ways from which effectiveness can be assessed. Instruments focusing on actual time spent for the course, especially for online students, are actually an important factor that could significantly contribute to the findings of the research.

Mortality- Yes, this can be a threat because a student may drop out of the course during the duration of the study. Fortunately, though, this event did not happen in the study.