If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.
You already know Dokkio is an AI-powered assistant to organize & manage your digital files & messages. Very soon, Dokkio will support Outlook as well as One Drive. Check it out today!

Christopher Williams - Meta-Analysis

Page history last edited by Christopher Wayne Williams 13 years, 1 month ago

Evaluation of Evidence-Based Practices in Online Learning

A Meta-Analysis and Review of Online Learning Studies

1. What were the measures used in this study?

The measures used in this study were primarily objective measures utilized to contrast face-to-face with online learning. By taking the difference in mean of the treatment group and the control group, and dividing by the pooled standard deviation they were able to determine an effect size. Effect sizes, as discussed by J. Cohen were defined as:

≤ .20 is considered Small
.21 - .79 are considered Medium
≥ .80 are considered Large

Learning outcomes were measured by:

Standardized Test Scores
Researcher Created Assessment Scores
Teacher Created Assessment Scores
Grades
Grade Point Averages

Teacher-Learner outcomes were measured through

Content Knowledge Assessment
Lesson Plan Analysis
Class Activity Logs and Observations
Portfolio Analysis
Supervisor Job Performance Ratings

The general determination of the meta-analysis found that online and hybrid learning environments had better learning outcomes. Additional variations of online learning were also tested including interactive video, online quizzes, and online activities.

2. How did the researchers define “better”?

While not completely defined, the term "better", through statistically significant positive effect sizes, as in the +.20 effect size, as described by J. Cohen, would be considered "better", if p>.5, otherwise it wasn't considered significant at all, and thus the learning outcome was considered to basically be without merit.

3. How did the researchers define “performance?

Again, while not clearly defined, performance was based on reviewing both the pre, and post tests to determine if there was a viable increase in scores. Through review of such things as multiple choice tests, course examinations, SAT test scores, and the use of collaborative tools, for example, performance tended to be higher when modules provided a self-assessment after each modules conclusion. In turn, the online and hybrid delivery mechanisms provided a performance boost to these final scores when tested.