Research Article Critique
Your Name: Kärin Renner
Article title and source:
Young, S. and McSporran, M. (2001). Does gender matter in online learning? Association of
Learning Technology Journal, 9(2), 3-15. Retrieved March 1, 2006, from
http://hyperdisc.unitec.ac.nz/research/ALTJpaper_9.pdf
Background or introduction:
Some researchers claim that women are disadvantaged in an online course. The author’s premise is that
“online courses need to be people friendly so that no learners are disadvantaged.”
Young and McSporran teach a first year introductory college course called Internet and Web Design in
a traditional course setting. Starting in fall semester 1999, they started offering flexibility so that
students could complete the course remotely. This article cites the results of data gathered from their
online learners during 3 semesters and one summer session of their class.
Research question:
The question is something like: Are there gender-based differences in performance and learning in
online courses?
Literature review:
Young and McSporran cite 17 previous studies on gender based differences in learning in their
introduction. Topics of these studies range from the disadvantages women face as online learners to
aggressive and dominating behaviors displayed by males in online environments to learning styles of
female students.
Method:
The authors collected data for this study from 270-280 students in the following ways: (varies because
of attrition, dropouts, etc.)
1. Qualitative and quantitative pre and post-course surveys including demographics and comments
about the experience of online learning using a Likert scale.
2. Formative and summative student assessment results from throughout the course.
3. Focus groups—listed but not discussed in any detail
4. Analysis of course website usage—not listed in Study Methodology but was graphed and discussed
Findings:
Young and McSporran found among their male students lower mean scores on the two major
assignments (research project and webpage project), greater non-submission of a whole assignment,
greater non-completion of all parts of each assignment, lower bulletin board participation, a lower
course website page hits or views, and a lower number of weekly quiz attempts.
Article conclusion:
In Young and McSporran’s web-based class, women are more successful than men. Young and
McSporran concluded that men are overconfident, they don’t follow instructions, they don’t fully
utilize the learning materials provided to them, and they tend to leave assignments until the last minute
or don’t complete all parts of them. Women, on the other hand, methodically complete all exercises
and read all course notes and all parts of the assignments.
The evidence appears to support their hypothesis that their course works well for women and mature
students. Their online course favors women, who seem to be more motivated, better at scheduling
their learning and better at communicating online. Male students seem to need the structure of a
traditional classroom setting.
Good points of article:
 This study utilized multiple forms of data collection methods.
 Meaningful comparison is made possible with the consistent use of methods of assessment
across semesters. “There have been no changes to the method of assessment across the
semesters so we are able to compare results from students who studied in class with those who
studied completely online” (p. 4).
 The authors rightly exercised caution in their interpretation of their study findings by
acknowledging that factors other than the experience of learning online may have been
responsible for online students’ better performance. “…the online learners did better than their
classroom counterparts….However, we don’t attribute this to students learning better online,
instead it is more likely that the better students, with greater prior knowledge of the subject, or
better developed work ethics, tend to choose to work online” (p. 6). This is an important
acknowledgement because the study design did not control for extraneous variables.
 In the discussion sections (pp. 8-10), the researchers compare their study findings to previous
research done in this field.
 The authors offer suggestions/techniques for helping their male students to achieve.
Poor points of article:
 The research question is never clearly stated but instead must be inferred from the reported
findings in the section titled Study Methodology.

Focus groups are listed as a research method but mentioned only once and not until the
discussion portion of the article

Analysis of course website usage statistics is NOT listed under study methodology but IS and
graphed in the results section.

The authors say that “...the online learners did better than their classroom counterparts,
although the differences are not significant” (p. 6) This statement leaves the reader to wonder
whether a test of significant difference of means was used. If so, the findings were not
described in this article.

After their 2nd online semester, the authors began to “explicitly warn their over-confident young
males of the pitfalls of online learning, and sent out regular emails to remind them” (p. 8). This
practice could introduce bias; all learners should receive same treatment.