COMPARISON OF FINAL EXAM SCORES BETWEEN STUDENTS ENROLLED IN A
HYBRID COURSE AND STUDENTS ENROLLED
IN A FACE-TO-FACE COURSE
Research Methodology
Jason C. Little
Franklin Pierce College
Hy Edelstein
Massachusetts Cluster
A practicum report presented to Programs for Higher Education
In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the
Degree of Doctor of Education
Nova Southeastern University
August, 2002
2
Abstract of a practicum report presented to Nova Southeastern
University in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of Doctor of Education
COMPARISON OF FINAL EXAM SCORES BETWEEN STUDENTS ENROLLED IN A
HYBRID COURSE AND STUDENTS ENROLLED
IN A FACE-TO-FACE COURSE
by
Jason C. Little
August, 2002
The Graduate and Professional Studies Program (GPS) at Franklin Pierce College (FPC),
delivers courses using two instructional formats. The first is a traditional format whereby the
instructor meets with a group of students face-to-face. The second is a hybrid version that is
delivered 50% online and 50% face-to-face.
The nature of the problem is that it is unknown if adult learners who attend GPS at FPC
attain a higher level of learning when enrolled in a hybrid course versus a 100% face-to-face
course. The purpose of this research study was to determine if students who take a Small Business
Management course via a hybrid-teaching model had a significantly different final exam mean
score (0-100) as opposed to students who took the course via the traditional 100% in-class
lecture/discussion format. The research question was "Do Franklin Pierce College undergraduate
students, enrolled in a GPS Small Business Management course attain significantly different mean
final exam scores for a hybrid delivered course in comparison to another group of students, who
take the same course delivered in a 100%, face-to-face format?"
3
It was hypothesized that one group of students would have a significantly higher mean final exam
score and the other group would have a significantly lower mean final exam score.
Two procedures were used for this study. First, a literature review was conducted.
Second, data for the sample were collected ex post facto since the treatment had already occurred.
The researcher obtained the data from a GPS faculty member who taught the same course using
both delivery formats. A non-random sampling was used. A t-test for two independent samples
was used with both groups having an equal variance.
The results of the literature review suggested a non-significant phenomenon with respect to
student learning outcomes. The results of the t-test suggested at the .05 level of significance, there
was no statistical difference in the means of the hybrid group and the face-to-face group.
It was concluded that the null hypothesis was accepted which was, “There will be no
statistically significant difference, at the .05 level, between the mean final exam scores in Small
Business Management of students receiving instruction under the hybrid version and the mean
final exam scores in Small Business Management of students receiving instruction under the faceto-face version.”
It was recommended that similar studies be replicated over time in other academic areas to
determine if hybrid courses would be appropriate. It was also recommended that studies be
conducted that focus on student satisfaction and drop out rates with respect to taking hybrid
courses. Lastly, it was recommended that on-going studies measure to what extent FPC alumni
are applying technological skills gained from taking hybrid courses to their work setting.
4
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF TABLES ...........................................................................................................................7
Chapter
1.
INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................8
Nature of the Problem .........................................................................................................8
Purpose of the Study ...........................................................................................................9
Significance to the Institution ...........................................................................................10
Relationship to the Course ................................................................................................11
Research Question ............................................................................................................11
Research Hypothesis .........................................................................................................11
Definition of Terms...........................................................................................................11
2.
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE .......................................................................................13
An Overview of Web-Based Education and the Hybrid Model .......................................13
Description and Elements ............................................................................................13
Trends in Web-Based and Distance Education ............................................................14
Characteristics of Online Learners and Prerequisites ..................................................15
Interaction and a Sampling of Learning Activities ......................................................17
Benefits of Web-Based Education ...............................................................................19
Assessment of Web-Based Education ..............................................................................20
No Significant Difference Studies ...............................................................................20
Significant Difference Studies .....................................................................................21
Research Shortcomings ................................................................................................22
Summary ...........................................................................................................................24
3.
METHODOLOGY AND PROCEDURES ............................................................................25
5
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont.)
Data Collection .................................................................................................................25
Description of the Population ......................................................................................25
Sample..........................................................................................................................25
Treatment .....................................................................................................................26
Instrument ....................................................................................................................27
Scoring .........................................................................................................................27
Data Analysis ...................................................................................................................27
Null Hypothesis ...........................................................................................................28
Alternative Hypothesis.................................................................................................28
Level of Significance ...................................................................................................28
Region of Rejection .....................................................................................................28
Statistical Test ..............................................................................................................28
Assumptions.....................................................................................................................29
Limitations .......................................................................................................................29
4.
RESULTS ..............................................................................................................................30
Results of the Literature ...................................................................................................30
Results of the Data Collection .........................................................................................30
5.
DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS .......33
Discussion ........................................................................................................................33
Conclusions ......................................................................................................................34
Implications......................................................................................................................34
Recommendations ............................................................................................................36
Recommendations for Improving Educational Practice .............................................36
Recommendations for Dissemination .........................................................................36
6
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont.)
Recommendations for Further Research .....................................................................37
REFERENCES ..............................................................................................................................38
APPENDIXES ...............................................................................................................................42
A. Small Business Management Syllabus for Hybrid Format .................................................43
B. Small Business Management Syllabus for Face-to-Face Format........................................47
C. Spreadsheet Data for Hybrid and Face-to-Face Final Exam Scores ...................................51
7
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table
1. Data Summary ...............................................................................................................32
2. Results of Two-Tailed t Test..........................................................................................32
8
Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION
Franklin Pierce College (FPC) is a baccalaureate degree granting, independent,
nondenominational, coeducational college that was founded in 1962. The main campus (located in
Rindge, New Hampshire) serves approximately 1,500 traditional undergraduate students and
offers over 40 majors in the areas of Behavioral Sciences, Business Administration, Humanities,
Natural Sciences, and Performing and Visual Arts. The college also operates six Graduate and
Professional Studies (GPS) satellite campuses scattered throughout the state of New Hampshire,
serving roughly 2,200 nontraditional students. In addition to baccalaureate degrees awarded at
both campuses, the GPS division offers a Master's of Business Administration in Leadership
Degree. The overall mission of the college is to offer "…a student-centered higher educational
opportunity to individuals committed to academic and personal achievements…. The hallmark
goal of Franklin Pierce College is to prepare its students to function well as citizens and leaders of
a democratic society" (Franklin Pierce Academic Catalogue, 2000-2001, p. 3).
The focus of this research study was centered on non-traditional students enrolled in the
GPS Program. Graduate and Professional students account for a significant portion of FPC’s
overall enrollment. One of the factors why this is the case, is linked to the national trend of
disproportionately more adult learners returning to college compared to the traditional college age
bracket. “Students who are older than the traditional 17 to 22 year-old range now constitute the
majority of the higher education population” (McKeachie, 1999, p. 219).
Nature of the Problem
The Graduate and Professional Studies Program (GPS) services a wide gamut of ages
using two instructional delivery formats. The first format includes traditional classroom settings
that are offered in the evening. During the spring of 2000, the GPS division formed an alliance
with e-College (education web portal) and added a second format involving an online hybrid
9
version for evening students. The Electronic Learning Laboratory (eLL) allows students to enroll
in courses that are delivered 50% in the classroom and 50% online. The hybrid format appears to
have attracted computer literate, self-directed, and self-motivated adult learners (R. Van der Riet,
personal communication, April 7, 2001), but it is unknown if learning outcomes in this group are
any different from students taking traditional classes. The problem is that it is unknown if adult
learners who attend the Graduate and Professional Studies Program at Franklin Pierce College
attain a higher level of learning when enrolled in a 50/50 hybrid-course (50% online and 50% inclass) versus a 100% traditional face-to-face class.
The specific course selected for this study was Small Business Management. This course
was chosen for several reasons. First, the author wanted to identify an instructor who taught the
same course, at the same GPS satellite campus, to help ensure the validity and reliability of the
study. Second, although the author is actively engaged in delivering both instructional formats to
other GPS classes, the rationale of selecting another faculty member helped ensure against
subjectivity issues on behalf of the researcher. Both the instructor teaching the course and the
students taking the class had no idea they would be involved in any future study at the time each
course was delivered. Third, since the author is a business faculty member, he wanted to select a
course related to that field so that the recommendations presented in this study could be
incorporated in future course work for the purpose of enhancing learning outcomes of business
students.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this research study was to determine if students who take a Small Business
Management course via a hybrid-teaching model had a significantly different final exam mean
score (0-100) as opposed to students who took the course via the traditional 100% in-class
lecture/discussion format. The researcher and other educators at FPC may want to consider the
results of this study for curriculum and courses when they are designing or revising them.
10
Significance to the Institution
This study will provide the FPC community with objective data that will allow instructors
and the administration to make rational decisions related to web-based learning. Since many
learners have different learning styles and many teachers have different teaching styles, this study
may be useful in determining the effectiveness of delivering a hybrid version course versus a
100%, face-to-face course.
Small and midsize liberal arts colleges are currently under intense competitive pressure
and many higher education institutions are reallocating resources for efficiency (Dickeson, 1999).
With regard to technology, Franklin Pierce College continually evaluates how, what, why, and
where resources should be spent. Due to the explosive growth of online learning, especially with
regard to nontraditional students aged 23 years and older (McQueen, 2000), institutions such as
FPC are investing in, experimenting with, and assessing web-based learning. Web-based learning
and the Internet are still very much in the infancy stage. Likewise, the research associated with
web-based learning is limited. In this respect, the FPC community will find this research study
valuable. By determining what delivery methods are most effective for GPS students, the College
will be able to invest appropriately in the infrastructure (be it web related or in-class related) and
continue to attract adult learners who seek programming that match their learning styles.
One of the themes presented in FPC’s mission statement is to “…admit students with
varying levels of past achievement, [and encourage them] to become actively engaged in their own
learning” (Franklin Pierce Academic Catalogue, 2000-2001, p. 3). Lifetime learning requires in
part, the learner to identify what delivery format works best for he/she. Exposure to various
delivery formats may be useful in this respect. Since FPC’s mission statement encourages lifelong learning, it is important for the College to help facilitate formats that aid learners and the
learning process.
11
Relationship to Course
This practicum was directly related to the Research Methodology course with respect that
many of the principles, theories, and statistical formulas presented in the course were used in
conducting the research. Inferential statistics were used to “…make inferences or predictions
about the similarity of a sample to the population from which the sample [was] drawn” (McMillan
& Schumacher, 2001, p. 207). The goal of any inferential statistical procedure is to determine in a
precise way the probability of something (p. 360). In this regard, the researcher reached a
conclusion related to student assessment (final exams) of delivering a hybrid version course
compared to a face-to-face course.
Research Question
There is one research question for this study. "Do Franklin Pierce College undergraduate
students, enrolled in a GPS Small Business Management course attain significantly different mean
final exam scores for a hybrid delivered course in comparison to another group of students, who
take the same course delivered in a 100%, face-to-face format?"
Research Hypothesis
The research hypothesis for this study is there will be a significant difference in the means
of final exam scores in a Small Business Management course between two groups of students who
take a hybrid delivery format and a traditional face-to-face format, at a Franklin Pierce College
Graduate and Professional satellite campus. It was hypothesized that one group of students would
have a significantly higher mean final exam score and the other group would have a significantly
lower mean final exam score.
Definition of Terms
For the purposes of this practicum, the following terms need clarification.
Asynchronous learning. A learning environment that allows students the flexibility of
learning on their own time schedules.
12
Cyberlearning. A learning method that incorporates online learning activities via the
World Wide Web and Internet.
Education web portal. A point of entry to the Internet that is focused on education
represents a portal.
Graduate and Professional Studies Program (GPS). Franklin Pierce College (FPC) degree
programs serving undergraduate and graduate students, primarily delivered in the evening, to adult
learners.
Hybrid model. An instructional delivery format that integrates face-to-face classroom
instruction with on-line learning activities and communication.
Online learning activities. As used within this study, online learning activities include (but
are not limited to) video links, audio links, text links, journals, threaded discussions, quizzes, chat
rooms, email communication, collaborative projects, and Web site investigations.
Web-based education. This term relates to delivering education partially or fully online by
way of the Internet.
13
Chapter 2
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
An Overview of Web-Based Education and the Hybrid Model
Description and Elements
Web-based education incorporates the Internet as a medium for delivering education
partially or fully online. The hybrid model is a form of web-based education that combines faceto-face delivery in the classroom, as well as an online component. “The model integrates the
convenience and flexibility associated with distance learning technology while providing personal
contact with faculty and peers associated with the traditional weekly class meeting (“Welcome to,”
2002). There are several elements that are characteristic of the hybrid model:
1. The teacher and learner are separated during the instructional process some of the time.
2. Text, graphic files, audio, and video are commonly used as educational media forms
for the online portion.
3. In addition to communication in the classroom, communication between teacher and
student commonly occurs via email (“What is distance,” 2002).
These elements lend themselves to an education portal that most institutions patronize such as
WebCT, eCollege, or Blackboard. Education portals charge fees to the education institution and
allow faculty to use course tools (courseware) with respect to designing online courses. Palloff
and Pratt (2001) describe the various courseware applications:
Most courseware applications now allow instructors to customize their courses in many
ways. Asynchronous discussions can be supplemented with the use of synchronous or chat
sessions. Video and audio clips can be used. Instructors can post PowerPoint slides or
other graphic illustrations of the material being studied. Support documents – such as
handouts, articles, and lecture notes – can be posted to a course site. Links to other sites of
interest or to another textbook can be established. Whiteboard sessions can be held, in
which synchronous discussion can occur while graphics are annotated or brainstorming
sessions are going on (p. 7).
14
Assessment tools are also available to the instructor. For example, gradebooks and online
quiz building functions allow for instantaneous feedback to students. The combination of online
tools as well as traditional face-to-face learning activities greatly expands the possibilities
available to the instructor and learning experiences of students.
Trends in Web-based and Distance Education
Web-based education has grown significantly during the last several years. The National
Center for Education Statistics reported in 1995 that only 22% of higher education institutions
engaged in asynchronous courses, three years later that statistic skyrocketed to 60% (“Quick
Tables,” 2002). Another report from Market Data Retrieval, a Dun & Bradstreet educational
research company, suggests that the number of colleges offering online degrees doubled for the
1999-2000 academic year compared with the year before (McQueen, 2000). The distant learning
trend is expected to continue as can be attested by International Data Corporation that projects for
the year 2002, 85% of higher education institutions will be offering courses online and that 15% of
all enrolled higher education students will be taking courses using this format ("Distance
Learning," 1999). “According to a recent study conducted by eBrain Market Research, more than
65% of adults in online households are interested in continuing their education via distance
learning” (“eBrain Study,” 2002). These studies suggest that web-based education is attracting an
increasing number of students. John Chambers, CEO of Cisco Systems has identified education as
the “next big killer application for the Internet” (Friedman, 1999, p. A25).
One particular segment that is interested in the convenience of an "any time, any place"
degree program is the adult student aged 25 years and over. By 2010, an estimated 6.8 million
students aged 25 and older will be returning to college (Projections of Education Statistics to
2010, 2000). This proportion of the total higher education student population will represent 39%.
"Adults returning to education settings represent a rapidly growing educational market segment"
(Towell, 2000, p. 14). Frances, Pumerantz, and Caplan (1999) state the following:
15
Increased college-going by adults has been the greatest source of enrollment growth in the
recent past; distance education – often using IT – has facilitated adult participation; the
combination of the two is likely to be a major driver of increased demand for college into
the foreseeable future (p. 26)
Since many of these students will be working and/or raising a family, they will more than likely be
looking for convenience and flexibility when they take courses.
Characteristics of Online Learners and Prerequisites
Studies suggest that students who take web-based courses “…are generally older, have
completed more college credit hours and more degree programs, and have a higher all-college
prior GPA than their traditional counterparts” (Diaz, 2002, ¶ 4). These academic experiences are
well suited to the independent learner. Diaz (2002) “…found that successful online students
exhibited a higher average GPA prior to enrollment in the online course (avg. GPA = 3.02) than
unsuccessful students (avg. GPA = 2.25)” (¶ 5).
Grasha and Yangarber-Hicks (2000) also purport that online students are independent
learners, but who think more abstractly than their counterparts. “Some research indicates that
introverts may perform better in an online class. On the other hand, extroverts may not be as
satisfied or able to establish their ‘presence’ as well in an online course” (“Online Course Design,”
2001, p. 2). Bento & Bento (2000) state “…many times students who do not participate actively
in the face-to-face environment, because of factors such as shyness or foreign accents, find it
incredibly liberating to interact electronically” (p. 605). The ideas of learners as independent
learners and tendencies toward introversion should be considered with respect to class participants
when an educator is considering delivering a web-based course.
Students should “…have a minimum computer competence level…. If they are unfamiliar
with the process of uploading or downloading files, using email and browsing the Internet, they
are likely to be frustrated” (Zirkle & Guan, 2000, p. 18). Perhaps one of the most important steps
an online educator can take is to meet with the class face-to-face, very early in the course. The
16
instructor can use this time to demonstrate the education portal and present the online course
components, via a projection system. “In a classroom setup where students have laptops,
instructors can also have students practice the concepts [and online learning activities] being
presented right in class. There is no substitute for this sort of on-the-spot reinforcement” (Levine,
2002, p. 17).
It is unfortunate that some students may not have Internet access. According to the Gartner
Group's Digital Divide and American Society report, only 35% of the lowest socioeconomic status
Americans have Internet access compared with over 50% for all other socioeconomic brackets
("Internet Access,” 2000). Research conducted by the Pew Internet and American Life Project
found that 31% of households earning less than $30,000 have access ("Internet Access,” 2000).
Two other studies help validate the idea that less income translates into the likelihood of no online
access. A recent National Public Radio survey confirms, "…lower-income Americans are less
than half as likely as those with higher incomes to have an Internet connection at home" (Peizer,
2000). Another study conducted by Rutger's University discovered that 39% of the working poor
and unemployed had access to the Internet compared to 76% of other employees (Beazley, 1999).
All of these research studies strongly suggest that income is linked with having online access.
Other factors may also play a role such as level of education, race, disabilities, and geographic
location. However, an earlier literature review conducted by the author suggests that income is the
number one influencing factor as to whether a person has Internet access or not (Little, 2000).
Therefore, it may be important for the educator to have some idea as to the socio-economic
backgrounds of the students he/she will be facilitating with any web-based technology.
According to a recent report from the chancellor’s office of the community college system
for the state of California “…the typical profile of a distance education student is of a white
female, between the ages of 20 and 24” (“Distance Ed,” 2001, p. 3). The report also addresses
course completion rates for distance education students. The report suggests that 52% of students
17
are likely to complete a distance education course versus 65% for non-distance education students.
The distance education students also tend to be older. Another study by Phipps and Merisotis
(1999) also confirms drop out rates are higher for students taking distance education courses.
However, dropout rates for students taking “…hybrid courses have lower dropout rates than do
fully online courses” (Young, 2002, A33).
Interaction and a Sampling of Learning Activities
Personalization helps students feel less apprehensive with respect to taking a web-based
course. “Teachers should include photos and some personal information so students can begin to
make a connection” (Zirkle & Guan, 2000, p. 18). Likewise, students should be encouraged to
“…construct their own home page on the course site to break down some walls” (p. 18). In order
to maintain control and open communication between students and the instructor, Mitchell (2001)
suggests e-learning “…works best if the class size is limited to 25 people to allow for optimal
group interaction” (p. 84). It is helpful if the instructor posts on the course site, his/her email
address, phone number, and other forms of communication. To help validate the importance of
communication, the author of this report has discovered students lose interest in a web-based
course very quickly if the instructor is not accessible for help, especially with regard to technology
problems.
Learning activities that facilitate communication between all students and the instructor
can help with the success of a web-based course. Threaded discussions (also called discussion
boards and web forums) allow for asynchronous communication. One may post a response any
time from any location, thus allowing complete convenience to the participant. “The messages are
stored on the board’s web site and their headers are listed in a logical tree of threads and subthreads…. Each new thread indicates a main topic, responses to those topics appear as subthreads” (Bento & Bento, 2000, p. 603).
18
As with any online learning activity, “instructors should provide clear guidelines for
interaction with students… and well-designed discussion assignments [that] facilitate meaningful
cooperation among students” (Graham, Cagiltay, Lim, Craner, & Duffy, 2001, p. 2). Threaded
discussion topics should engage learners in the content. Learners should be required to participate
and a due date for postings should be explicit. Feedback from the instructor is also vital.
Evaluation should be based on the quality of postings and not necessarily the length. Many
education portals allow for easy tracking for the instructor with respect to monitoring which
students have submitted postings.
Another popular online learning activity involves collaborative learning. Students can
work on problems and projects in a virtual team setting, across geographic and timeless
boundaries. The use of the World Wide Web as a text-based collaborative learning environment
has recently been harnessed with graphics and multimedia-rich environments. "Learners can
directly experience, manipulate, and create objects in their multimedia-rich environments available
to them" (Looi & Ang, 2000, p. 2). File sharing applications and the integration of a multimediarich environment has facilitated group learning at a higher level.
Collaborative learning exercises can help in facilitating students in "…negotiating roles,
determining required resources, collecting data, searching for literature, filtering and synthesizing
information, conceptualizing multiple solutions, and agreeing on the most effective solution"
(Bernard & Lundgren-Cayrol, 2001, p. 241). Norman and Schmidt (1992) suggest students are
highly motivated with respect to collaborative learning projects. Palloff and Pratt (2001) also
suggest students are more motivated in collaborative settings as opposed to other learning
environments. "Collaborative learning processes help students to achieve deeper levels of
knowledge generation through the creation of shared goals, shared exploration, …[and] an
engagement in a …learning process [that] forms the foundation of a learning community" (pp. 3233).
19
Benefits of Web-based Education
Web-based education can be summed up as being very flexible when compared to 100%,
traditional face-to-face classes. Time and place do not matter. Students can access course work
when and where they may be. This approach “…encourages students to contribute to the course
because it is readily accessible and amendable to all schedules” (Dabbagh, 2002). Dabbagh
(2002) also suggests many other advantages that include (a) the archiving of class activities that
allows for access beyond the timeframe of the course, (b) the expansion of opportunities for
students to contribute to the course through the use of asynchronous communication tools, (c) the
encouragement of active learning through the use of just-in-time learning resources and online
threaded discussion, (d) the facilitation of peer review and expert intervention, and (e) the
promotion of learning through multiple forms of interaction distributed across space, time, and
various media (¶ 2).
Palloff and Pratt (2001) suggest online learning activities that include multimedia may be
beneficial to various types of learners:
Many of the technological developments may be helpful in accommodating various student
learning style. An auditory learner, for example, may feel more comfortable listening to a
brief audio clip explaining a concept than reading about it. A visual learner tends to do
well in an environment that presents mainly text or uses video clips. A learner who is
more kinesthetic may appreciate assignments requiring visits to other websites on the
Internet and the incorporation of online research. All of these techniques also help to keep
things interesting for students who feel the need for more activity in a learning situation”
(p. 7).
McKeachie (1999) also suggests various technological formats are appropriate for various learners
(pp. 183-200). He further suggests that learners are successful in electronic environments if there
is an invitation to the right kind of cognitive action that encourages active learning (p. 17). This
type of environment is more productive than passive forms of learning, such a lecture format.
Web-based learning benefits students and graduates for the workforce. Students who
acquire technological skills such as web research skills, online collaborative communication skills,
20
software skills, and the like will be in a much better position with respect to career advancement
and opportunities. Many studies suggest that there is a shortage of workers who are competent
with technology in the workplace (Judy & D’Amico, 1997; U.S. Department of Labor, 2001).
Web-based learning helps facilitate online technology skills that are becoming increasingly
important in a global marketplace.
Assessment of Web-Based Education
No Significant Difference Studies
Thomas L. Russell tracks studies of distance education methods (Young, 2000). He
maintains and continually updates a Web site containing over 400 research studies that suggest
“the no significance difference phenomenon” (p. 55). These studies are also available in a
companion book (Russell, 1999). Most studies suggest that distance education methods, including
web-based, are just as effective as traditional methods. Russell states:
There is so much research on this matter that I find it incomprehensible that any
reasonable, knowledgeable, unbiased, and professional person could deny the fact that
technology can deliver instruction as well as traditional modes – at least when we look at
student populations as a large group (Young, R., 2000, ¶ 5).
A study conducted by Navarro and Shoemaker (1999a), showed that cyberlearners achieved
approximately the same learning as traditional learners as measured by test scores. Kortemeyer &
Bauer (1999), discovered similar results with regard to final exam scores of students exposed to
traditional lectures versus students receiving computerized lectures. Both of these studies are
available in summary form on Russell’s web site (Russell, 2002b).
Criticism of Russell’s (1999) compendium of research studies has been noted with respect
to the inflation of the number of documents that reach the no significant difference conclusion.
“…There is considerable cross-referencing, where many of the papers and summaries cite similar
research and/or reference each other…. In addition, many of the writings cited in the volume are
not original research studies” (Phipps & Merisotis, 1999, p. 18). Brown and Wack (1999) also
21
question Russell’s (1999) compendium of studies by suggesting that the references are “…to
papers presented at conferences and to papers published by university offices, not university
presses…. The point is that a considerable fraction of the references … has not passed through the
ordinary processes of peer review for publication” (¶ 6).
A study conducted by Ostiguy and Haffer (2000) suggests that students enrolled in an
undergraduate introductory course in environmental science had “…no significant difference in
the mean pre- or post test scores… [who were] enrolled in three learning environments” (p. 373).
Three different settings were used that included a studio classroom, a simultaneous cable
broadcast, and a separate web-based course, delivered during the spring of 1998. A random
sampling of students to each setting was not used because only certain students had access to cable
or the web. All students received the same syllabus containing the reading, assignments, exams,
text, etc. Roughly a third of each section had previously enrolled in a distant education course and
the mean age for each section was either 23 or 24 (pp. 372-373).
Significant Difference Studies
Thomas L. Russell (2002a) also maintains a sister website on significant difference studies.
The site is a bibliography of numerous studies that for the most part suggest cyberlearners perform
significantly better than traditional learners. For example, one study posted by Russell is one
conducted by Navarro and Shoemaker (1999b). The study concluded that online learners
performed significantly better when compared to traditional learners. The mean score (final exam)
for the web-based learners was 11.3 while the mean score for the traditional classroom learner was
9.8. With a t-test statistic of 3.70, this result was statistically significant at the 99% level.
As with Russell (2002a), McCormack and Jones (1997) also have identified numerous
surveys and case studies that suggest distance education delivery formats are more successful than
large in-class survey courses. One such study conducted by Schutte (1996), found that test scores
for both midterm and final examinations were higher by an average of 20% for those enrolled in
22
the on-line course, when compared to a control group of students enrolled in a traditional class
setting for an undergraduate sociology course (p=<.001). Using a random systematic sampling
technique of the enrollment sheet, Schutte divided 37 enrolled students “…such that 19 students
appeared in the traditional class and 18 appeared in the virtual classroom” (¶ 5). Schutte removed
two students from each section for failing to complete the semester’s work and did not include
them in his study. Thus, 17 students in the traditional class and 16 students in the virtual class
were included in his study. “…No significant differences appeared in any of the demographic or
experiential variables [and] tests were administered at the same time and location” (¶ 10). This
study contradicts the previously mentioned study of Ostiguy and Haffer (2000) who discovered
that there was no significant difference of test scores of students enrolled in a web-based course,
cable broadcast, and traditional classroom setting.
Far less research has been conducted with respect to hybrid courses that utilize the web.
However, research conducted by the Research Initiative for Teaching Effectiveness at the
University of Central Florida “…shows that student success rates in hybrid courses on the Central
Florida campus are equivalent or slightly superior to face-to-face courses” (Young, 2002, A33).
Additional research suggests that hybrid courses have lower drop out rates than 100% delivered
online courses.
Research Shortcomings
Much criticism has been directed to the research comparing distance education with
traditional educational settings. One of the most compelling recent reports is titled What’s the
Difference? A Review of Contemporary Research on the Effectiveness of Distance Learning in
Higher Education, by Phipps and Merisotis (1999). The authors of this report address the
following as key shortcomings of the available research:
1. Much of the research does not control for extraneous variable and therefore cannot
show cause and effect.
23
2. Most of the studies do not use randomly selected subjects.
3. The validity and reliability of the instruments used to measure student outcomes and
attitudes are questionable.
4. Many studies do not adequately control for the feelings and attitudes of the students
and faculty – what the educational research refers to as “reactive effects” (pp. 3-4).
Phipps and Merisotis (1999) state to accurately assess relationships, “…other potential
causes must not influence the measured outcomes” (p. 4). For example, in one study the authors
suggest that real time collaboration could in fact be deemed a variable that should be controlled (p.
20). The issue of validity and reliability of the instruments such as exams are supposed to instill
confidence of the results by the reader. The authors suggest in many of the studies they reviewed,
that the exams may not have measured what they were supposed to measure (p. 4).
With respect to randomly selected subjects, students should be assigned randomly to both
the experimental and control groups. “However, many of the published studies reviewed [by
Phipps and Merisotis] used intact groups for comparison purposes… these studies run the risk of
having a number of variables affecting academic achievement… not just the technology used to
provide the education at a distance” (Phipps & Merisotis, 1999, p. 4). Diaz (2000) argues that
randomly selected students are not practical (¶ 5):
“The reality of enrollment patterns is that students will self-select into courses based on reasons
important to them, such as preferences for certain teachers, or locations, or personal schedules.
Randomizing subjects in distance education may increase generalizability in theory, but in practice
many of the findings are not likely to be useful, unless one assumes that students who are
randomly assigned are representative of those who self-select into a course” (¶ 5).
Extraneous variables, randomly selected students, and the validity and reliability of student
assessment instruments are issues that could pose problems for comparison studies. It is important
for the researcher to at least point these shortfalls out in any research reports. Phipps and
Merisotis (1999) suggest many of the studies in Russell’s (1999) compendium of research studies
neglect to address or mention these.
24
Summary
The convenience and flexibility of web-based education has attracted many students to
higher education programs and course work. Institutions during the last several years have added
a significant number of courses to their schedules that are web-based, including some that are
delivered 100% online, and some that are of the hybrid version. The hybrid delivery format
involves face-to-face delivery as well as the use of the online technology. Numerous studies
suggest that web-based education will become increasingly popular, especially for non-traditional
students and working adults.
Many online learning activities allow for new ways of learning such as asynchronous
threaded discussions and collaborative learning exercises. Many of these exercises in essence are
helping students prepare for their careers and/or are enriching what they already do. The students
who use online learning technologies will most likely be strategically positioned for better job
opportunities than those students who do not, since much of what is done by present day
organizations is information and communication centered that requires a highly skilled workforce.
Education researchers are faced with the complex task of assessing students and their use
of technology in education. Numerous non-significant and significant studies have been
conducted. However, criticism has been cited with respect to controlling for extraneous variables,
random sampling techniques, and the validity and reliability of the assessment instruments. There
is no conclusive evidence that one delivery format is more successful than another. On-going
research such as this research practicum report may suggest otherwise.
25
Chapter 3
METHODOLOGY AND PROCEDURES
Data Collection
The following procedures were used to complete this ex post facto quasi-experimental
research study. First, a review of the literature was conducted. The review included an overview
of web-based education, assessment of web-based education including no-significant difference
studies, significant difference studies, and research shortcomings. Second, data for the sample
were collected ex post facto since the treatment had already occurred. A GPS faculty member,
who taught the Small Business Management course for FPC, provided the data. The researcher
obtained the data during January 2002 for each group of students who received the hybrid and
face-to-face version of the course.
Description of the Population
The population of this research study was made up of all past, current, and future students
enrolled in the Small Business Management courses held during the evening face-to-face session
and those enrolled in the Small Business Management courses that involve the hybrid version. The
demographics of both groups were similar. Approximately 80% of all students in the courses
were aged 22-40 years old (G. Sykes, personal communication, June 21, 2002). The vast majority
of students enrolled in the courses were from New Hampshire (approximately 90%), with the
balance from the bordering state of Vermont. Students generally were full-time workers and
enrolled in the courses due to daytime work commitments.
Sample
A convenience non-random sampling was used and consisted of a cumulative number of
26 students who completed the Small Business Management course. Group A consisted of 18
students who were enrolled in the hybrid version that was taught during the months of September
and October of 2000 for eight weeks. The hybrid students physically met once a week from 5:30
26
– 8:00 p.m. on Tuesdays, with the remaining learning time spent with online learning activities.
Group B consisted of eight students who were enrolled in the 100% face-to-face delivery format.
The course was taught during the months of November and December of 1998, and met from 5:30
– 8:00 p.m. on Mondays and Wednesdays for eight weeks. Both groups met at the Lebanon, New
Hampshire campus.
Treatment
Small Business Management is an upper-level business elective primarily taken by juniors
and seniors. The Franklin Pierce College Academic Catalogue (2000) states: “The Small Business
Management course focuses on organizational structure, financing, accounting and budgeting,
advertising, purchasing, risk management, and personnel administration” (p. 117).
Both syllabuses for the 100% hybrid (Appendix A) and the face-to-face classes (Appendix
B) stated the same “Desired Learning Objectives” and required the same text. In addition, both
classes had a final exam, a group presentation that focused on seeking funding for a small start-up
business, classroom discussions, and an attendance/participation statement policy. The group
project consisted of members who the instructor assigned.
There were some differences with respect to some of the learning activities when
comparing the two class formats. The 100% face-to-face class required a short interview with a
person who started up his/her own small business and also had a midterm exam. The hybrid
formatted class on the other hand, required case studies, current article preparation (for the in-class
portion), online quizzes, threaded discussions, and journal entries (online) with respect to the
advantages and disadvantages of the delivery model and input on the progression of the overall
course. The threaded discussions allowed students to communicate in an asynchronous manner.
Each Friday the instructor reviewed threaded discussion entries and provided input.
27
Instrument
The final exam that was completed by students for both the 100% face-to-face delivery
format and the hybrid format were very similar. Section one of the exam contained 10 multiple
choice questions and students were instructed to choose 7 out of 10 questions to answer. Section
two of the exam contained fill in the blank questions and students were instructed to choose 8 out
of 10 questions. The third section of the exam required essay format. Students were given five to
six questions to answer, and students were instructed to choose three of them. The first two
sections required no quantitative analysis. The third section included questions that required math
computations. The exams were validated by the Business Division administration.
Scoring
Tests were scored on a 100-point basis. Section one and two of the exam counted for 50%
of the exam, while section three counted for the balance of the remaining 50%. The instructor of
the course was responsible for the design, the distribution, and the grading of the exam. All final
exam were distributed on the last scheduled night of class for each section.
Data Analysis
Data was analyzed to determine if Small Business Management GPS students, who
received the hybrid formatted course scored different mean final exam scores when compared to
students who enrolled in the 100% face-to-face version. A t-test for two-independent samples was
used to determine if any significant difference existed between the means of both groups at the .05
level. A comparison of the calculated t value to the critical t value was used to determine if the t
value was significant. If the calculated t value was equal to or greater than the critical t value, the
null hypothesis would have been rejected and the alternative hypothesis accepted. The data
analysis relates directly to the research question: "Do Franklin Pierce College undergraduate
students, enrolled in a GPS Small Business Management course attain significantly different mean
28
final exam scores for a hybrid delivered course in comparison to another group of students, who
take the same course delivered in a 100%, face-to-face format?"
Null Hypothesis
There will be no statistically significant difference, at the .05 level, between the mean final
exam scores in Small Business Management of students receiving instruction under the hybrid
version and the mean final exam scores in Small Business Management of students receiving
instruction under the face-to-face version.
Alternative Hypothesis
There will be a statistically significant difference, at the .05 level, between the mean final
exam scores in Small Business Management of students receiving instruction under the hybrid
version and the mean final exam scores in Small Business Management of students receiving
instruction under the face-to-face version.
Level of Significance
A significance level of .05 was utilized for this study. A two-tailed test was used for a
nondirectional hypothesis.
Region of Rejection
Since the study hypothesized that there was no significant difference between the final
mean scores of the hybrid students and the face-to-face students, any observed difference could
have fallen in either tail of the sample.
Statistical Test
A t-test for two-independent samples was used. The final exam scores were measured
using an interval scale. The degrees of freedom (factors in sample size) were calculated by adding
the number of students in both groups and subtracting two.
29
Assumptions
For this practicum, it was assumed that students of the hybrid course represented typical
GPS FPC undergraduate students. It was assumed that all students of both groups were
demographically similar and had the necessary minimal skills and knowledge level to be
successful. It was further assumed that the final exams of the two delivery formats were similar,
and that the instructor used similar presentation formats when he met with both classes face-toface.
Limitations
The study was limited to FPC’s GPS undergraduate program and assessment of the hybrid
delivery model and face-to-face model of a specific course. The sample size was also a limitation.
“…In research comparing groups there should be at least fifteen subjects in each group (some
highly controlled experiments will contain as few as eight to ten subjects in each group)”
(MacMillan & Schumacher, 2001, p. 177). While the hybrid class consisted of a reasonable
number of participants, it would have been preferable to have a sample size greater than eight for
the 100% face-to-face class. The sample that was used was non-randomized and represents
another limitation of the study. Lastly, almost two years had passed between the delivery of both
courses. To control for the extraneous variable of time, the delivery of the same course during the
same time frame would have helped addressed internal validity concerns.
30
Chapter 4
RESULTS
Results of the Literature Review
The review of the literature provided a framework with respect to conducting this study.
Many studies suggest web-based education will continue to play a significant role with respect to
higher education institutions and the students who enroll in them. As a result of this input, several
topics emerged as the basis for the review, including characteristics of online learners, online
learning activities, benefits of web-based education, and most importantly research studies that
focused on no significant difference, significant difference, and research shortcomings. The
research shortcomings suggest that it is nearly impossible for researchers to control for extraneous
variables when comparing multiple delivered formatted courses.
Results of the Data Collection
Final exam scores were collected from the instructor of the Small Business Management
course during January 2002. The total number of students who took the final exam amounted to
26. Eighteen of the students (Group A) were enrolled in the hybrid version that was taught
September and October of 2000. Eight students (Group B) were enrolled in the face-to-face
format that was taught during the months of November and December of 1998.
The test scores for both groups were tabulated and entered into Microsoft's Excel 1998
spreadsheet application program. All students were anonymous to the researcher as the instructor
of the two groups provided only final exam scores. Each student's final exam score was based on
a percentage. The results of these scores are presented in Appendix C.
Computations generated by the software package revealed a mean of 84.28 for the hybrid
group (Group A) and a mean of 77.5 for the face-to-face group (Group B). The standard deviation
for the hybrid group was 8.83046 and 9.36559 for the face-to-face group. There were a total of 18
students from the hybrid course and 8 students from the face-to-face course (see Table 1).
31
A two-tailed t-test (assuming equal variances) was used to determine the significance
between the two independent sample means. The degrees of freedom (df) was calculated to be 26
and was based on the formula df = (n1 + n2) - 2. The t statistic was calculated to be 1.774313.
The t critical value was 2.063898. Based on the level of significance of .05, and the theory that
the t statistic value of 1.774313 needed to exceed the t critical value of 2.063898, the null
hypothesis failed to be rejected. Therefore, there is no statistical difference in the means of the
hybrid group and the face-to-face group, and the null hypothesis was accepted (see table 2).
The research hypothesis for this study was as follows: "there will be a significant
difference in the means of final exam scores in a Small Business Management course between two
groups of students who take a hybrid delivery format and a traditional face-to-face format, at a
Franklin Pierce College Graduate and Professional satellite campus."
The null hypothesis for this study was as follows: "There will be no statistically significant
difference, at the .05 level, between the mean final exam scores in Small Business Management of
students receiving instruction under the hybrid version and the mean final exam scores in Small
Business Management of students receiving instruction under the face-to-face version."
32
Table 1
Data Summary
______________________________________________________________________________
Group
Meana
SD
n
A
84.277778
8.83046
18
B
77.5
9.36559
8
______________________________________________________________________________
Note. a Final exam scores
Table 2
Results of Two-Tailed t Test
___________________________________________________________________________
Measurement
Value
df
26
Level of signifcance
.05
t Statistic
1.774313
t Critical
2.063898
______________________________________________________________________________
33
Chapter 5
DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Discussion
The literature review and results relate directly to the purpose of the study, which was to
determine if students who take a Small Business Management course via a hybrid-teaching model
had a significantly different final exam mean score as opposed to students who took the course via
the traditional 100% in-class lecture/discussion format. In addition, the literature review clearly
supported the importance of web-based education in higher education and reasons why learners of
different demographic and socio-economic backgrounds may be more prone and successful in
using online learning technologies.
Numerous research studies suggest the no-significant difference phenomenon. Russell
(1999) purports when examining the overall student population as a large group, there is nosignificant difference in student learning outcomes via instruction delivered by technology, as well
as the traditional mode of face-to-face. Navarro and Shoemaker (1999a), and Ostiguy and Haffer
(2000) also support this viewpoint based on their research studies of comparing groups of online
learners with face-to-face learners. Research conducted by the Research Initiative for Teaching
Effectiveness at the University of Central Florida (Young, 2002) suggests that student success
rates in hybrid courses differ very little to student success rates of those enrolled in 100% face-toface courses. All of these studies concur with the results of this study. Students who enrolled in
the hybrid version of the Small Business Management course did not attain a significant difference
in the means of final exam scores when compared to students who took the course via the
traditional 100% in-class lecture/discussion format.
Research shortcomings are controversial with respect to the research that has taken place
involving different courses and programs delivered in different formats. Phipps and Merisotis
(1999) suggest that many of the research studies do not control for extraneous variables and do not
34
use randomly selected subjects. The author of this study found it was not possible to control for
all extraneous variables such as the time (days, months, and year) when the courses were
delivered. However, with respect to the random sampling shortfall, the author concurs with Diaz
(2000) who argues that randomly selected students are not practical “…unless one assumes that
students who are randomly assigned are representative of those who self-select into a course” (¶
5).
Conclusions
The research question for this study was: "Do Franklin Pierce College undergraduate
students, enrolled in a GPS Small Business Management course attain significantly different mean
final exam scores for a hybrid delivered course in comparison to another group of students, who
take the same course delivered in a 100%, face-to-face format?" It was concluded from the results
of the statistical test that the null hypothesis was accepted. Based on the level of significance of
.05, and that the t statistic value of 1.774313 needed to exceed the t critical value of 2.063898, the
null hypothesis failed to be rejected. Therefore, there was no statistical difference in the mean
final exam scores of the hybrid group and the face-to-face group.
Implications
The results of this study and much of the literature review strongly suggests that there is no
significant difference with respect to mean final exam scores of students enrolled in web-based
courses or face-to-face courses. This is an important point since trends in web-based education
usage are expected to rise at a robust pace (“Distance Learning,” 1999), incoming traditional
college students will expect and need technologically driven instructional formats, and an
increasing non-traditional adult population will seek the convenience of any place, any time
learning (Frances, Pumerantz, and Caplan, 1999; Towell, 2000).
Since 15% of all students enrolled in higher education are projected to take courses using
web-based education during 2002 (“Distance Learning”, 1999), many institutions have adapted
35
their strategic plans and forward-looking statements. One such case is that of the author’s
institution. The author currently serves on the Franklin Pierce College Computing Advisory
Committee and was recently a key player in crafting a pedagogical technology statement that reads
as follows:
The world is rapidly changing, and it is clear that the 21st century is a multi-media age. As
the technological demands of the world change, the landscape of pedagogy is changing as
well. Literacy itself has been redefined in the last decade to include information and
computer literacy. Students need and expect to be prepared to enter this new information
age. To be successful as learners, to be successful in the workplace, and to be successful in
society, they require these skills and knowledge.
Franklin Pierce College recognizes that it is presented with a significant opportunity to be
part of the debate that is shaping the pedagogy of the 21st century. As an institution, we
want to define the ways technology is used in education. Since technology in education
encompasses so many possibilities and changes so rapidly and because teaching styles and
learning styles have such variability, Franklin Pierce College recognizes that its faculty are
the College's most powerful resource in leading this effort (Franklin Pierce College
Computing Advisory Committee, 2002).
This statement represents an ever-changing landscape in education. Education that incorporates
multi-media and online delivery formats currently is in demand. A recent Franklin Pierce College
survey distributed during the fall of 2001, entitled An Analysis of Franklin Pierce College Student
Attitudes Toward Hybrid Courses (Hollins, Robblee, Bergstrom, Armstrong, Walker, & Alaimo,
2001) was used to help support if there was a need from the students’ perspective. It was
discovered that 50% of the traditional FPC student population would like to take a web-based
course.
Since there is demand everywhere for web-based courses, assessment will be an ongoing
concern. The no-significant phenomenon is key in this regard since accrediting agencies,
administrators, faculty, and ultimately employers will be looking at how education has
transformed an individual. The implications of this study that compares final exam scores suggest
students can learn and demonstrate they have learned course material via a web-based course as
well as with a face-to-face course. In addition, they have developed online learning skills that
36
could be useful in the workforce. This is important point since many studies suggest there is a
shortage of workers who are competent with technology in the workplace (Judy & D’Amico,
1997; U.S. Department of Labor, 2001).
Recommendations
Recommendations for Improving Educational Practice
It was recommended that FPC continue to develop different hybrid courses for all students
enrolled in courses both at the Rindge campus (traditional students) and at the Graduate and
Professional Studies Program (non-traditional students). Since this study and the literature suggest
a no-significant phenomenon, students should have choice as to the instructional delivery format
that works for them. In a higher education market that has become increasingly competitive,
choices and options that are available to students will allow for increased competitive advantage
for institutions that adopt this strategy.
It was recommended that faculty members be encouraged to experiment with different
instructional delivery formats. Directly related to this idea is the option for faculty training. The
College should facilitate faculty-training sessions with respect to web-based learning activities.
By encouraging faculty to use web-based technologies, students will be better served and the
College will remain competitive with other institutions.
Recommendations for Dissemination
It was recommended that the results of this study be disseminated to the administrators of
Franklin Pierce College including the Provost, Academic Dean of Rindge Campus, Dean of
Graduate and Professional Studies, Campus Directors, and Division Chairs. It was recommended
that the report be distributed by sending hard copies to the appropriate parties as well as posting
the study on the College’s intranet web site.
37
Recommendations for Further Research
It was recommended that further research be conducted. Although this study focused on a
Small Business Management course, it is not known whether hybrid course formats would be
successful for students in other academic areas such as the sciences and humanities. Similar
studies could be replicated over time in other academic areas.
It was recommended that further studies be conducted with respect to student satisfaction
and drop out rates with respect to comparing students who elect hybrid courses compared to
students who elect face-to-face courses. Further, it is not known how students have adopted
technology in their work setting after graduation. It was recommended that the Alumni Office
conduct studies with respect to how students are utilizing their online technology skills that were
developed by taking a hybrid course(s).
38
REFERENCES
Beazley, M. (1999, July). Record of the DTI/social exclusion policy action team 15 visit to the
Sparkbrook, Sparkhill and Tyseley area regeneration initiative (sstari) Birmingham.
Birmingham, United Kingdom: University of Birmingham, School of Public Policy.
Bento, R., & Bento, A. (2000, December). Using the web to extend and support classroom
learning. College Student Journal, 34(4), 603-609.
Bernard, R., & Lundgren-Cayrol, K. (2001). Computer conferencing: An environment for
collaborative project-based learning in distance education. Educational Research and
Evaluation, 7(2), 241-261.
Brown, G. & Wack, M. (1999, May/June). The difference frenzy and matching buckshot with
buckshot. The Technology Source. Retrieved January 15, 2002 from
http://ts.mivu.org/default.asp?show=article&id=459
Dabbagh, N. (2002). Using a web-based course management tool to support face-to-face
instruction. The Michigan Virtual University. Retrieved March 17, 2002 from
http://www.ts.mivu.org/default.asp?show=article&id=938.
Diaz, D. (2000, March/April). Carving a new path for distance education research. The
Technology Source. Retrieved May 15, 2002 from
http://ts.mivu.org/default.asp?show=article&id=648.
Diaz, D. (2002, May/June). Online dropout rates revisited. The Technology Source. Retrieved
May 1, 2002 from http://ts.mivu.org/defaulty.asp?show=article&id=981.
Dickeson, R. (1999). Prioritizing academic programs and services: Reallocating resources to
achieve strategic balance. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Distance ed is not catching fire in Calif. (2001, October). On Campus, 21(2), 3.
Distance learning may soar to 85% at higher education schools by 2002. (1999, March 31).
Education Technology News.
Ebrain Study: More than 65% of U.S. adults are interested in distance learning. (2002). Retrieved
January 31, 2002 from http://www.ecollege.com/eduator/News_ebrain.html.
Frances, C., Pumerantz, R., & Caplan, J. (1999, July/August). Planning for instructional
Technology. Change.
Franklin Pierce College. (2000). Academic Catalogue.
Franklin Pierce College Computing Advisory Committee, (2002, February). Pedagogical
technology statement. Rindge, NH.
Friedman, T. (1999, November 17). Next it's e-ducation. New York Times, 149(51709), A25.
39
Grasha, A., & Yangarber-Hicks, N. (2000, Winter). Integrating teaching styles and learning
styles with instructional technology. College Teaching, 48(1), 2-11.
Hollins, B., Roblee, V., Bergstrom, A., Armstrong, A., Walker, C., & Alaimo, L. (2001,
December). An analysis of Franklin Pierce College student attitudes toward hybrid
courses. Unpublished paper, Franklin Pierce College, Rindge, NH.
Internet access in america: Who's got it, who needs it? (2000). Cyberatlas. Retrieved
November 17, 2000 from
http://cyberatlas.internet.com/big_picture/geographics/article/0,,5911_474291,00.html.
Judy, R., & D’Amico, C. (1997). Workforce 2020. Indianapolis, Indiana: Hudson Institute.
Kortemeyer, G., & Bauer, W. (1999, October). Multimedia collaboration content creation: The
MSU lecture online system. Journal of Engineering Education.
Levine, L. (2002, January). Using technology to enhance the classroom environment. Journal of
Technological Horizons in Education. 16-18.
Little, J. (2000, December). A literature review of the digital divide: Characteristics of people
least likely to be online. Unpublished doctoral paper, Nova Southeastern University, Fort
Lauderdale, FL.
Looi, C., & Ang, D. (2000, March). A multimedia-enhanced collaborative learning environment.
Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 16(1), 2-14.
McCormack, C., & Jones, D. (1997). Building a web-based education system. New York, NY:
John Wiley & Sons.
McKeachie, W. (1999). Teaching tips. (10th ed.). Lexington, MA: Heath & Co.
McMillan, J., & Schumacher, S. (2001). Research in education: A conceptual introduction. (4th
ed.). New York, NY: HarperCollins College Publishers.
McQueen, A. (2000). Report: College internet use rising. Franklin Pierce College, Office of
Strategic Analysis. Retrieved January 5, 2002 from
http://research.fpc.edu/resources/internet_use.htm.
Mitchell, L. (2001, April 4). E-learning methods offer a personalized approach. InfoWorld. 84.
Navarro, P., & Shoemaker, J. (1999a). The power of cyberlearning: An empirical test. Journal
of Computing in Higher Education.
Navarro, P., & Shoemaker, J. (1999b). Economics in cyberspace: A comparison study.
Discussion Paper. University of California at Irvine, Graduate School of Management.
Norman, G., & Schmidt, H. (1992). The psychological basis of problem-based learning: A
review of the evidence. Academic Medicine 67, 557-565.
40
Online course design. (2001). Retrieved January 27, 2001 from
http://web.grcc.cc.mi.us/ids/bb_courseinfo/bbcourseinfo_coursedesign.html.
Ostiguy, N. & Haffer, A. (2000). Assessing differences in instructional methods. Journal of
College Science Teaching, XXX(6), 370-374.
Palloff, R., & Pratt, K. (2001). Lessons from the cyberspace classroom: The realities of online
teaching. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Peizer, J. (2000). What do we mean when we say ‘digital divide?’ Retrieved December 2, 2000
from http://www.digitaldividenetwork.or/tdd.adp.
Phipps, R, & Merisotis, J. (1999). What’s the difference? A review of contemporary research on
the effectiveness of distance learning in higher education. Washington, DC: The Institute
for Higher Education Policy.
Projections of education statistics to 2010. (2000). National Center for Education Statistics.
Retrived January 5, 2002 from
http://www.nces.ed/gov/pubs2000/projections/chapter2.html.
Russell, T. (1999). The no significant difference phenomenon. Chapel Hill, NC: Office of
Instructional Telecommunications, North Carolina State University.
Russell, T. (2002a). Significant difference. Retrieved January 14, 2002 from
http://teleducation.nb.ca?significantdifference/index.cfm?searching=1999&category=year
&docsearch=1
Russell, T. (2002b). The no significant difference phenomenon. Retrieved January 14, 2002 from
http://teleducation.nb.ca?nosignificantdifference/index.cfm?searching=1999&category=ye
ar&docsearch=1
Quick tables and figures. (2002). National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved April 16,
2002 from http://nces.ed.gov/quicktables.
Schutte, J. (1996). Virtual teaching in higher education: The new intellectual superhighway or
just another traffic jam? Retrieved January 15, 2002 from
http://www.csun.edu/sociology/virexp.htm.
Towell, E. (2000, Spring). Internet courses, mature learners: Two undervalued market segments.
New Horizons in Adult Education 14(2).
U.S. Department of Labor. (2001). Occupational outlook handbook. Retrieved February 18,
2002 from http://stats.bls.gov/oco/ocoie.htm.
Welcome to Franklin Pierce College online. (2002). Retrieved April 16, 2002 from
http://www.fpconline.net.
What is distance education? (2002). Distance Learning Resource Network. Retrieved January 15,
2002 from http://www.dlrn.org/library/dl/whatis.html.
41
Young, J. (2000, February 18). Distance and classroom education seen as equally effective. The
Chronicle of Higher Education. A55.
Young, J. (2002, March 22). ‘Hybrid’ teaching seeks to end the divide between traditional and
online instruction. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 48(28), A33.
Zirkle, C., & Guan, S. (2000, May). The journey into distance education. Techniques:
Connecting Education & Careers, 75(5), 18-22.
42
APPENDIXES
43
Appendix A
Small Business Management Syllabus for Hybrid Format
FRANKLIN PIERCE COLLEGE
DIVISION OF GRADUATE & PROFESSIONAL STUDIES
SMALL BUSINESS MANAGEMENT MN-371
SYLLABUS
Lebanon Campus
George Sykes
Term I 2000-2001
Tuesday 5:30 - 8:00 p.m.
George.Sykes@Valley.net
(603) 448-0319
COURSE DESCRIPTION:
This course explores the problems encountered in the formulation and administration of a small
enterprise. Specific areas include: Organizational structure, its tax implications, financing,
accounting, budgeting, advertising, purchasing, risk management, and personnel administration.
DESIRED LEARNING OBJECTIVES:
This course seeks to integrate knowledge from the several areas of management studies, and from
other business administration areas, into an examination of starting and sucessfully operating a
small business. The student should develop and understanding of the human traits needed in these
endeavors. Students should also understand the characteristics, problems and advantages of small
business management and their own potential for entreprenuership While not every student will
pursue a career in small business, everyone will ultimately deal with small businesses as a vendor,
customer, supplier, etc. It is most helpful for students to understand the nature of the challenges
and rewards offered by this extremely important sector of the economy.
CLASS METHODOLOGY:
The structure of the class will be case studies, research and practical application of theories from
the text. Emphasis will be placed on classroom discussions, and on-line threaded discussions as
they pertain to the subject matter. In a perfect learning environment, students will discover
concepts, and relate these same concepts to their own individual situation. The use of the internet
will be a vital part of this course. Class will meet one night per week (Tuesdays 5:30p.m.8:05p.m.) and the balance of the course lecture will be on-line using www.fpconline.net
REQUIRED TEXT:
Essential of Entrepreneurship and Small Business Management-2nd edition, Zimmerer and
Scarborough
COURSE PRE-REQUISITES:
AC102, MK201, MN201
44
COURSE REQUIREMENTS:
Students will need word processing and spreadsheet software for submission of homework
and/or case studies.
Students are responsible for each assignment & will be required to use the Internet for research
and to footnote that research.
Students are expected to come to each on campus class (Tuesdays) having read at least one
current article related to the course. The exceptional student will have chosen an article which
directly relates to the topic for that night's class
Students are expected to complete all assignments, including reading assignments, and be
prepared for class,either in the classroom or on-line. It is essential to be prepared for each class,
students that do not will have great difficulty.
The ability of students to research, prepare, work cooperatively, write, and complete a
presentation is at the CORE of this enterprise. The verbal skills necessary to complete a
presentation is the mark of the excellent student.
All work will be submitted when due. No assignments/cases will be accepted after due date.
FPC ONLINE SCHEDULE:
Every Friday, beginning September 8th the instructor will review threaded discussion topics and
will respond to student's input.
JOURNAL ENTRY:
Students will be asked to submit comments on the merits and shortcomings of the ACT
(Advanced Career Track) delivery model along with input on the progression of the overall
course. Each submission needs to be at least a paragraph. These submissions will be biweekly and included in the Unit requirements.
ATTENDANCE POLICY:
Absenteeism which is not excused ahead of time will affect the final grade unless arrangements
have been made to make up all required work.**** 4 Classes Missed = Drop of 1 letter
grade**** (NOTE: Your online participation will be tracked and will be part of your overall
participation grade.)
6 Classes Missed = Automatic Failure
GRADING POLICY:
40% Case Studies and Presentation
15% Online Quizzes
30% Final Exam
15% Participation and Attendance
LEARNING DISABILITIES:
In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, any student in this class who has a
documented learning disability will be provided with reasonable accommodations designed to
meet his/her needs. Before any such assistance can occur, it is the responsibility of the student to
see that documentation is on file with the Campus Director. Please see me as soon as possible to
discuss any need for accommodations.
45
ACADEMIC DISHONESTY POLICY:
Franklin Pierce College requires all students to adhere to a high standard of integrity in their
academic work. Activities such a plagiarism and cheating are not acceptable and will not be
condoned by the College. Students involved in such activities are subject to serious disciplinary
action.
PLAGIARISM:
Is defined as the use, whether by paraphrase or direct quotation of a work published or
unpublished, of another person's ideas, words, statistics, or other creative materials, without full
and clear acknowledgement that the work belongs to that other person.
CHEATING:
Is defined to include the giving or receiving of unauthorized assistance on quizzes, examinations,
and written assignments from any source not approved by the instructor. Students involved in
such activities are subject to serious disciplinary action, including, but not limited to, failure for
the assignment, failure for the course, and/or expulsion from the College.
ASSIGNMENTS: (Note: All assignments that are due on a Thursday must be submitted via
online)
CLASS
9/5/00
CHAPTER
Chapter 1 & 2
ASSIGNMENT DUE NEXT CLASS
Case 1 Page 11 "You Be the Consultant"
9/7/00
Online Unit 1
See Unit 1
9/12/00
Chapter 3
Discussion Questions Pg 31; Surfing the Web
#2
9/14/00
Online Unit 2
See Unit 2
9/19/00
Chapter 4
Case 4 Buying an Existing Business
9/21/00
Online Unit 3
See Unit 3
9/26/00
Chapter 5 & 6
9/28/00
Online Unit
10/3/00
Chapter 7
10/5/00
Online Unit 5
See Unit 5
10/10/00
Chapter 9 & pg 527 Pg 292
"You be the Consultant"; Surfing the Web #2
10/12/99
Online Unit 6
See Unit 6
10/17/00
Chapter 10 Pg 335
"You be the Consultant"; Surfing the Web #1
&2
10/19/00
Online Unit 7
See Unit 7
10/24/00
In Class Presentations
Business Plan
10/26/00
Final Exam
Case 5 Customers: Key to Success "Go to"
http://www.marketingtips.com/tipshr.html
See Unit 4
"You be the Consultant" Page 235 Submit
web addresses for Managing Cash Flows (3
sites minimum)
47
Appendix B
Small Business Management Syllabus for Face-to-Face Format
FRANKLIN PIERCE COLLEGE
DIVISION OF GRADUATE & PROFESSIONAL STUDIES
SMALL BUSINESS MANAGEMENT (MN 371)
SYLLABUS
Lebanon Campus
Term II 1998
George Sykes
George Sykes@LebCity.com
M/W 5:30-8:00 p.m.
Course Description
This course explores the problems encountered in the formulation and administration of a small
enterprise. Specific areas include: Organizational structure, financing, accounting and budgeting,
advertising, purchasing, risk management, and personnel administration.
Objectives of the Management Major
The Management program aims to develop the reasoning ability of students as well as their skills
in human relations. Students learn to direct their behavior toward goals, and are given the
opportunity to develop their decision-making abilities. The program prepares students for
management career fields such as finance, manufacturing, marketing, and personnel.
Desired Learning Objectives
This course seeks to integrate knowledge from the several areas of management studies, and from
other business administration areas, into an examination of starting and successfully operating a
small business. The student should develop an understanding of the human traits needed in these
endeavors. Students should also understand the characteristics, problems and advantages of small
business management and their own potential for entrepreneurship.
While not every student will pursue a career in small business, everyone will ultimately deal with
small businesses as a vendor, customer, supplier, etc. It is most helpful for students to understand
the nature of the challenges and rewards offered by this extremely important sector of the
economy.
Class Methodology
The method of instruction for this course will be lectures on the underlying theory, its translation
into practical application, and group and individual activities. Emphasis will be placed on
classroom discussion as it pertains to these areas. Teaching strategies will include: lecture,
48
classroom discussions, case analysis, a course project, and written examinations. In a perfect
learning environment, students will discover concepts, and relate theses same concepts to their
own individual situation.
Coursed Requirements
General: Evaluation for this course will be based on scores on the two exams, a course project,
oral report, and class participation.
Examinations: The Midterm and Final may be composed of a variety of questions presented in
various formats…Multiple Choice, Fill-in-the-blanks, Short Essay and Long Essay.
Class Participation: Students are responsible for reading the assigned material before class on the
dates indicated. In addition, students should come to class having read at least one current article
about entrepreneurs, small business etc. Class participation is required. Absenteeism which is not
excused ahead of time will not affect the final grade provided arrangements have been made to
make up all required work. Students will be asked to perform a verbal analysis of a case study
which will be factored into their participation grade. Students will interview an Entrepreneur and
give a short oral report.
Course Project: The formal course project, required of all students in the course, will involve the
preparation of a business plan on the start-up of a small business, or for the growth of an existing
small business. This project will be completed by groups assigned by the instructor. Each group
will make a formal presentation of the Course Project as if it were seeking funding for the business
start-up or expansion from the officers of an investment capital firm or a bank lending committee.
The ability of students to research, prepare, work cooperatively, write, and complete a presentation
is at the CORE of this enterprise. The verbal skills necessary to complete a presentation is the
mark of the excellent student.
Required Text
Zimmer, Thomas W., and Norman M. Scarborough, Essentials of Entrepreneurship and Small
Business Mangement, 2nd edition, Prentice Hall.
Tests and Grading
Grades will be calculated based on the following:
Midterm Exam
Final Exam
Course Project
Class Participation
Short Interview
15%
25%
40%
10%
10%
49
Learning Disabilities
In accordance with the Americans with disabilities Act, any student in this class who has a
documented learning disability will be provided with reasonable accommodations designed to
meet his/her needs. Before any such assistance can occur, it is the responsibility of the student to
see that documentation is on file with the Campus Director. Please see me as soon as possible to
discuss any need for accommodations.
Academic Dishonesty Policy
Franklin Pierce College requires all students to adhere to the highest standards of scholarship and
integrity in their academic work. Plagiarism and cheating are not acceptable and will not be
condoned by the College. Any member of the academic community involved in such activities is
subject to serious disciplinary action.
By definition, “plagiarism” is the process of stealing or passing as one’s own the ideas, words,
statistics, or other creative materials of another, whether by paraphrase of direct quotation, without
the full and clear acknowledgment that the work belongs to that other person or entity. This
includes the purchase of other use of research projects from an outside vendor if those works are
then passed off as being the creation of the student. Cheating includes the giving of receiving of
unauthorized assistance on quizzes, examinations, written assignments, and other projects from
any source not approved by the instructor.
Since plagiarism strikes at the heart of the academic enterprise, it is taken very seriously at
Franklin Pierce College. The academic penalty for plagiarism is determined by the faculty
member involved and may be as severe as failure for the course. All incidents of plagiarism are
reported to the Dean of Graduate and Professional Studies and the Dean of the College, who may
take additional action as necessary, including expulsion from the College of the student(s)
involved.
If you have any questions regarding “borderline” academic behavior and whether it qualifies as
cheating or plagiarism, you are strongly urged to consult with your instructor and/or the Campus
Director before engaging in that behavior.
50
COURSE OUTLINE
Mtg.
Topic
Chapter Reading Due
Assignment Due
Nov. 2
Entrepreneurs and
The Capitalist System
Nov. 4
Business Plans
9
Nov. 9
Strategic Management
2
Nov. 11
Forms of Ownership/
Franchising
3
Nov. 16
Marketing Plans
5
Nov. 18
Pricing Strategies/
Advertising
6
Nov. 23
Managing Cash Flow
7
Oral Report
Nov. 25
Financial Plans
8
Oral Report
Nov. 30
Global Aspects of
Entrepreneurship
14
Mid-Term
Dec. 2
Ethical, Legal and
Regulatory Environment
15
Oral Report
Dec. 7
Location, Location, Location
11
Oral Report
Dec. 9
(NHFA)
Purchasing, Quality and
Inventory Control
12
Oral Report
Dec. 14
Leadership
13
Oral Report
Dec. 16
Sources of Funds/
10
Presentations
4
Presentations
Equity and Debt
Dec. 21
Dec. 23
Buying an Existing Business
Final Exam
51
Appendix C
Spreadsheet Data for Hybrid and Face-to-Face Final Exam Scores
Group A
Hybrid
Group B
Face-to-Face
97
93
88
90
75
60
88
90
80
80
88
83
88
90
87
77
90
73
87
78
67
93
83
70
72
70
t-Test: Two-Sample Assuming Equal Variances
Mean
Variance
Observations
Pooled Variance
df
t Stat
P(T<=t) two-tail
t Critical two-tail
Hybrid
Face
84.27778
77.5
77.97712 87.71429
18
8
80.81713
24
1.774313
0.0887
2.063898
52