Online Courses

Maki, Ruth H.; Maki, William S.

doi:10.1002/9780470713181.ch20

Cited by 31 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Specifically, because good communication is harder to achieve in online courses than in F2F courses due to the absence of any physical meetings, the lack of difference in communication with other students (and better communication with the course staff) suggests that online courses do not fail in comparison with F2F courses even when considering their main limitation. Finally, the null effect of course format in assignment assessments suggests that although students in online courses spend more time learning and performing tasks compared with students in F2F courses (Maki & Maki, 2007;Robertson et al, 2005), they do not necessarily perceive it to be more positive. This way, students' perceived communication in online courses can be at least as good as it is in F2F courses.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Specifically, although some focus on pedagogical and instructional aspects such as course design, students' interactions, instructor presence, satisfaction, and motivation, others compare the courses in regard to educational outcomes such as tasks and final grades (Baker, 2010;Balkin, Buckner, Swartz, & Rao, 2005;Crawford-Ferre & Wiest, 2012;Dixson, 2012;Lack, 2013;Maki & Maki, 2007;Osman, 2005;Sebastianelli, Swift, & Tamimi, 2015). Specifically, although some focus on pedagogical and instructional aspects such as course design, students' interactions, instructor presence, satisfaction, and motivation, others compare the courses in regard to educational outcomes such as tasks and final grades (Baker, 2010;Balkin, Buckner, Swartz, & Rao, 2005;Crawford-Ferre & Wiest, 2012;Dixson, 2012;Lack, 2013;Maki & Maki, 2007;Osman, 2005;Sebastianelli, Swift, & Tamimi, 2015).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Various variables are used in the literature for comparing the quality and effectiveness of online courses to F2F courses. Specifically, although some focus on pedagogical and instructional aspects such as course design, students' interactions, instructor presence, satisfaction, and motivation, others compare the courses in regard to educational outcomes such as tasks and final grades (Baker, 2010;Balkin, Buckner, Swartz, & Rao, 2005;Crawford-Ferre & Wiest, 2012;Dixson, 2012;Lack, 2013;Maki & Maki, 2007;Osman, 2005;Sebastianelli, Swift, & Tamimi, 2015). The following literature review will therefore focus on these aspects.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, this aspect is more meaningful in online courses due to the absence of physical meetings. As such, it is important to create opportunities for instructor-student and student-student interaction in online learning environments (Dixson, 2012;Maki & Maki, 2007;Swan et al, 2000;Young & Norgard, 2006). It is important to provide various means to facilitate such communication, including discussion forums, chat rooms, email, and synchronous meetings (Wallace, 2004).…”

Section: Communicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previous studies indicated that students in online courses spend much more time learning and performing tasks compared with F2F courses (Maki & Maki, 2007;Robertson, Grant, & Jackson, 2005).…”

Section: Tasks and Assignmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Effectiveness of learning in online academic courses compared with face‐to‐face courses in higher education

Soffer

Nachmias

2018

Computer Assisted Learning

131

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined the effectiveness of 3 online courses compared with the same 3 courses in a face‐to‐face (F2F) format, which had the same characteristics (e.g., the same instructor and final exam content and place). Effectiveness was examined by utilizing a wide range of variables, including 2 objective measures (N = 968): grades and completion rate; and 9 subjective measures (N = 360): 7 measures include instructional aspects (course structure, learning content, lessons watched, assignments, communication), engagement, and satisfaction. Findings indicate significant differences between online and F2F courses in most of the examined variables. Students in the online courses reported better understanding of the course structure, better communication with the course staff, watching the videos lessens more, and higher engagement and satisfaction. Students in the F2F courses reported better contribution of the learning content. Students' final grades were higher in the online courses, and no differences were found in the completion rate. The findings suggest that in many of the examined effectiveness aspects, online courses are as effective as, or more effective than, F2F courses. Interpretations of the findings are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Communicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Tasks and Assignmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Effectiveness of learning in online academic courses compared with face‐to‐face courses in higher education

Soffer

Nachmias

2018

Computer Assisted Learning

131

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Impact of Student Engagement on Affective Learning: Evidence from a Large Indian University

Gupta

Pandey

2016

Curr Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

You can’t always get what you want and it hurts: Learning during the pandemic.

Gurung¹,

Stone²

2023

Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Colleges and universities around the world switched to remote teaching in early 2020. In this study we assessed the experiences of students who experienced different operationalizations of remote teaching during the first full term of instruction during the COVID-19 pandemic. Students (N ϭ 649) in 11 sections of introductory psychology participated in an online assessment of their learning after completing their final exam. We examined the level of alignment between student preferences (e.g., for synchronous lectures) with the format of the classes they were in (e.g., featuring synchronous lectures) and used this measure of fit (aligned, misaligned, no preference) and students' modality based self-efficacy as predictors of learning. Self-efficacy predicted final exam scores and students' ratings of the skills learned, value of science, student learning outcomes (SLOs), class behaviors, and attitudes toward their class. Fit predicted differences in attitude and class related behaviors (e.g., studying). Self-efficacy also predicted the extent to which students changed their learning behaviors during the pandemic. Our results provide educators with key ways to prepare for additional remote teaching.

show abstract

Online Courses

Cited by 31 publications

References 46 publications

Effectiveness of learning in online academic courses compared with face‐to‐face courses in higher education

Effectiveness of learning in online academic courses compared with face‐to‐face courses in higher education

Impact of Student Engagement on Affective Learning: Evidence from a Large Indian University

You can’t always get what you want and it hurts: Learning during the pandemic.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About