The Impact of Blended Learning on Retention, Performance and Persistence in an Allied Health Gateway Lab/Lecture Course in an Urban Community College

Authors

  • Carlos Liachovitzky Bronx Community College of The City University of New York
  • Alexander Wolf Bronx Community College of The City University of New York

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.55420/2693.9193.v10.n1.307

Keywords:

blended learning, hybrid learning, distance learning, urban community college

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare blended and face-to-face (FTF) teaching in student learning outcomes, retention, likelihood of repeating the course, likelihood of taking the subsequent course in a sequence, and performance in the subsequent course. We tested the null hypotheses that all of the above mentioned variables were independent of the teaching format by comparing eight semesters of blended and FTF sections of Human Anatomy and Physiology I. We found no difference in retention, student learning outcomes, nor the likelihood of repeating the course. Completing a blended section of the first semester of Anatomy and Physiology did not have an impact on performance (grade distribution) in the second semester of Anatomy and Physiology relative to students in FTF sections. A large majority of students in a blended section answered that they would take a blended course again, and that they would recommend it to a friend. However, fewer students completing a blended section went on to the second semester of the course.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Abdullahi, A. S. (2011). Student exam participation and performances in a web-enhanced traditional and hybrid allied health biology course. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 7.

Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2013). Changing course: Ten years of tracking online education in the United States. Babson Survey Research Group and Quahog Research Group, LLC.

Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2017). Grade change. Tracking Online Education in the United States. Babson Survey Research Group and Quahog Research Group, LLC.

Al?Qahtani, A. A., & Higgins, S. E. (2013). Effects of traditional, blended and e?learning on students’ achievement in higher education. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29(3), 220–234.

Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Schmid, R. F., Tamim, R. M., & Abrami, P. C. (2014). A meta-analysis of blended learning and technology use in higher education: From the general to the applied. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 26(1), 87–122.

Brewer, S. E., Cinel, B., Harrison, M., & Mohr, C. L. (2013). First year chemistry laboratory courses for distance learners: Development and transfer credit acceptance. The International Review Of Research In Open And Distributed Learning, 14(3), 488–507.

Brinson, J. R. (2015). Learning outcome achievement in non-traditional (virtual and remote) versus traditional (hands-on) laboratories: A review of the empirical research. Computers & Education, 87, 218–237.

Burns, K., Duncan, M., Sweeney, D. C., North, J. W., & Ellegood, W. A. (2013). A longitudinal comparison of course delivery modes of an introductory information systems course and their impact on a subsequent information systems course. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 9(4), 453–467.

Carbonaro, M., King, S., Taylor, E., Satzinger, F., Snart, F., & Drummond, J. (2008). Integration of e-learning technologies in an interprofessional health science course. Medical Teacher, 30(1), 25–33.

Croxton, R. A. (2014). The role of interactivity in student satisfaction and persistence in online learning. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 10(2), 314.

Dantas, A. M., & Kemm, R. E. (2008). A blended approach to active learning in a physiology laboratory-based subject facilitated by an e-learning component. Advances in Physiology Education, 32(1), 65–75.

Dell, C. (2012). Evaluating program effectiveness for an online elementary education cohort. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 8(3), 189.

Driscoll, M., & Carliner, S. (2005). Advanced web-based training strategies: Unlocking instructionally sound online learning. John Wiley & Sons.

Grubb, W. N. (2002). Honored but invisible: An inside look at teaching in community colleges. Routledge.

Lee, S. J., Srinivasan, S., Trail, T., Lewis, D., & Lopez, S. (2011). Examining the relationship among student perception of support, course satisfaction, and learning outcomes in online learning. The Internet and Higher Education, 14(3), 158–163.

Levy, J. A. (2013). Causal-comparative study analyzing student success in hybrid anatomy and physiology courses. Northern Arizona University.

Lyall, R., & Patti, A. T. F. (2010). Taking the chemistry experience home—Home experiments or “Kitchen Chemistry.” Accessible Elements, 83.

Lowry, R (2019). VassarStats: Web Site for Statistical Computation. Retrieved from http://vassarstats.net/

McFarlin, B. K. (2008). Hybrid lecture-online format increases student grades in an undergraduate exercise physiology course at a large urban university. Advances in Physiology Education, 32(1), 86–91.

Means, Barbara, Toyama, Yukie, Murphy, Robert, & Marianne, B. (2013). The effectiveness of online and blended learning: A meta-analysis of the empirical literature. Teachers College Record, 115(3), 1–47.

Melton, B. F., Bland, H. W., & Chopak-Foss, J. (2009). Achievement and satisfaction in blended learning versus traditional general health course designs. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 3(1), 26.

Pereira, J. A., Pleguezuelos, E., Merí, A., Molina?Ros, A., Molina?Tomás, M. C., & Masdeu, C. (2007). Effectiveness of using blended learning strategies for teaching and learning human anatomy. Medical Education, 41(2), 189–195. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02672.x

Rovai, A. P., & Jordan, H. (2004). Blended learning and sense of community: A comparative analysis with traditional and fully online graduate courses. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 5(2).

Swan, K. (2001). Virtual interaction: Design factors affecting student satisfaction and perceived learning in asynchronous online courses. Distance Education, 22(2), 306–331.

Vamosi, A. R., Pierce, B. G., & Slotkin, M. H. (2004). Distance learning in an accounting principles course—Student satisfaction and perceptions of efficacy. Journal of Education for Business, 79(6), 360–366.

White, S., & Sykes, A. (2012). Evaluation of a blended learning approach used in an anatomy and physiology module for pre-registration healthcare students. ThinkMind/IARIA.

Windes, D. L., & Lesht, F. L. (2014). The effects of online teaching experience and institution type on faculty perceptions of teaching online. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 17(1).

Young, G. (2002). ’Hybrid’Teaching Seeks to End the Drive Between Traditional and Online Instruction. The Chronicle of Higher Education.

Zhao, Y, & Breslow, L. (2013). Literature review on hybrid/blended learning. Retrieved from https://tll. mit. edu/sites/default/files/library/Blended_Learning_Lit_Reveiw. pdf

Downloads

Published

2019-11-30

How to Cite

Liachovitzky, C., & Wolf, A. (2019). The Impact of Blended Learning on Retention, Performance and Persistence in an Allied Health Gateway Lab/Lecture Course in an Urban Community College. HETS Online Journal, 10(1), 233-250. https://doi.org/10.55420/2693.9193.v10.n1.307

Issue

Section

Articles