Does on-line flexible learning fulfil students’ needs and expectations?

Ian Smith, Sun-Hea Choi & Sandra Cairncross

School of Computing

Napier University, Edinburgh

Study

The aims of the study were to:

investigate the efficacy of flexible learning compared with traditional learning methods

determine other factors that influence learning progress

explore students’ experience and expectations

Subject Groups

The experimental groups were as follows:

Group 1: full-time traditional delivery. 50 full-time students, postgraduate multimedia programme, 2nd Semester 1999/2000

Group 2*: full-time flexible delivery. 50 full-time students, postgraduate multimedia programme, 2nd Semester 1999/2000

Group 3: part-time flexible delivery. 18 part-time students, postgraduate e-commerce programme, 1st Semester 1999/2000

* A limit of 50 full time students were given the opportunity to opt for the flexible mode on a first come basis.

Learning Materials and Support

Traditional

15 2hr lectures

15 1hr tutorials

Book of lecture notes

Flexible

Module Organiser

12 flexible units

– interactive word documents

Learning Support Environment

– FirstClass CMC

15 1hr drop in sessions

Macromedia curriculum guides

Multimedia Resource Centre (web site)

Multimedia Newsgroup

Methodology

Week 1, data was collected regarding students’ backgrounds, expectations of the module, attitudes to learning and the reasons for their choice of delivery mode.

Week 8, two major comparisons, between full-time and part-time flexible students and full-time traditional and flexible ones, were made.

Completion of the module, interviews with representative focus groups explored the students’ experience and whether their expectations were fulfilled.

Choice of Learning Delivery

Factors which do not seem to influence choice of learning delivery

Age

First language

Factors which influenced choice of learning delivery

Perceptions of learning delivery

Prior knowledge and experience

Personal circumstance

Attitudes to new experience

Gender

Student Expectations

Student Expectations

Group 1

Design and maintain a WWW site

Learn Technology behind Internet and trend

Learn Web Authoring tools

Learn HTML

Java applets

Group 2

Design and maintain a WWW site

Learn Technology behind Internet and trend

Learn Web Authoring tools

Learn HTML

E-commerce

Others (Database, Java applet, E-mail and etc.)

Conclusions:Student Expectations

A wide range expectations from from obtaining basic knowledge of designing a web site to becoming an expert in the WWW.

Expected the module would help improve their job performance or provide career opportunities in the future.

Students had various plans from getting a job to running their own business after finishing their studies.

Coping with Studies

Average ofthree

modules

IMMSD

Assessment Results (Average Percentage by Cohort)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

MDM MT

Perc

enta

ge

Group1 n=33 Group2 n=33

Semester 1 Semester 2

Comparative performance

Conclusions:Degree of coping with studies

Group 2 (the flexible learners) performed as well in the summative assessment as Group 1 (traditional delivery), yet these students reported they had difficulty coping with their studies.

One reason mentioned was difficulty in judging their progress. Anxiety was expressed about falling behind inasmuch as Group 2 students could not gauge how well they were doing with respect to others.

Perceptions of Learning Support & Materials

Learning Materials

Grading of learning materials for the module

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Poor 2 3 4 Excellent

Perc

enta

ge

Group 1 Group 2

Grading of learning support for the module

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Poor 2 3 4 Excellent

Perc

enta

ge

Group 1 Group 2

Learning Support

Use of Multimedia Newsgroup

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

Perc

enta

ge

Group 1 Group 2

Use of Multimedia Newsgroup

>once a day

weekly monthly nonedaily >once a week

Conclusions: Perceptions of learning support and materials

Group 2 rated their learning support and materials better than did Group 1. This was unexpected, since the core materials were similar and the support, though different, was comparable.

Student Learning

Student Perception of Learning

Perception of Learning

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Not at all 2 3 4 Very much

Perc

enta

ge

Group 1 Group 2

Time allocated by student’s for learning

Time scheduled for Learning

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

50-100 100-150 150-200 200-250 >250

Perc

enta

ge

Group 1 Group 2

Time spent by student’s learning

Time spent on Learning

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

50 -100 100 - 150 150 - 200 200 -250 > 250

Perc

enta

ge

Group 1 Group 2

Conclusions: Student Learning

Students’ perceptions of their learning outcomes appear to be related to how much they actually studied.

Overall the flexible students dedicated more time to their studies than initially planned. This may be due to the scheduling that is implicit in the structure of the flexible materials and the minimum time required to complete them.

Student Expectations Fulfilled

Fulfilment of Expectations

Expectations Fulfilled

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Not at all 2 3 4 Very much

Perc

enta

ge

Group 1 Group 2

Conclusions:Fulfilment of Expectations

Group 1 students graded the fulfilment of their expectations lower than the rest.

This does not concur with performance in the assessment nor the comparison of initial expectations between the two deliveries, since their expectations of the student groups were similar.

There maybe a connection between fulfilment of expectations and perception of quality of learning.

Does on-line flexible learning fulfil students’ needs and expectations?

Questions