Teaching and Engaging Computer
Literacy Students in a Digital
Environment
Bill Jaber, PhD and Mava Wilson, PhD
Computer Information Systems
Lee University, Department of Business
Background
Computer literate student population
Varying degrees of literacy
Disengaged in the introductory course
Computer literacy classes not meeting needs
Met and discussed with the administration a new
plan for the computer literacy courses
Student Needs
 Students largely disengaged
o Students growing up with technology
 Misunderstood surfing and social networking as computer
literate
 Experience indicated students not skilled in computer
concepts
o CISS 100 (Word, Excel, and PowerPoint)
o CISS 101 (Excel and Access)
The Plan
 Past computer literacy exam produced few passing scores
 Developed two proposals for consideration
o Plan 1 - The courses are going to be self-paced with a schedule using
SAM and e-books/traditional textbooks
o Plan 2 - The courses are going to traditional classroom setting
 Presented these plans to Department Chair and Dean
o The administrations elected to try Plan 1
 Pilot in Fall 2010, Expanded Pilot in Spring 2011
 Implementation in Fall 2011
The Design
General Literacy Course
o Pre/Post-Tests in Excel, Word, PP, Computer Literacy
 Option to receive “P” by passing all four with 80+
 No one was eligible Fall 2010 and Spring 2011
o Fall 2010
 SAM and e-book
 Two sections
o Spring 2011




SAM and B/W printed copy of textbook
TA for every 25 - 30 students
Tutoring Labs monitored by TAs
Two sections
The Design (cont)
Business Literacy Course
o Two regular sections (30 – 32 students) – Fall 2010
 SAM and Printed textbooks
 Pre/Post-Tests in Excel & Access
o Two large sections (50 – 60 students) – Spring 2011





SAM and e-books
Added TAs for every 25 – 30 students
Added multiple tutoring labs monitored by TAs
Class divided into half - Students attend one day a week, plus labs
Pre/Post-Tests in Excel & Access
The Design (Administrative Issues)
 Fewer Sections
 Fewer Part-time faculty
 Faculty Administrator responsible for all sections to maintain
continuity between sections (especially SAM)
 Tutoring Lab TAs/Coordinator
 Scheduling Rooms for Labs
 ROI vs Student Achievement/Satisfaction
The Design (Class Setup)
 Calendar with DUE dates
 Pre-Tests
 Training (simulation; observe, practice, apply; not for grade)
 Tutorials (simulation; up-to-three times; 10 chances per task;
graded)
 Projects (case problem; live in software; submit/receive
feedback immediately; submit up-to-three times; graded)
 Quizzes (second scenario; live in software; submit one time;
graded)
 Capstone Projects (cumulative; graded)
 Post-Tests (graded as test)
The Operation
 Attendance not required
 Self-paced, meeting deadlines
 Material completed = course completed
 Help = mini-lectures / explanations
o
o
o
o
In class
TAs
Tutoring Labs
Via email
 Pre/Post Tests In-Class
Student Experience
 No one passed all pretests
 eBook/access codes slow
purchasing
 B&W book/access codes
purchased quickly
 Time to get into method
of learning
 Little attendance for 8:00
class
 Student group attend
class
 SAM Very “picky” &
doesn’t follow standards
 Mac issues
Faculty Experience
Difficulty getting
everything setup
Issues with access first
few days
Important to have
everything ready
TAs mediated excessive
emails to faculty
Tutoring labs minimized
last minute “help” on
due dates
Grading scale “curve”
Survey Feedback Fall 2010
General
Literacy (GL)
Business
Literacy (BL)
Responses
26 (55)
23 (51)
Self-Paced component
25
Like
19
Dislike
3
1
No opinion
Compared to other sections
1
21
Better/much better
15
1
Not quite as good
1
Survey Feedback Spring 2011
General Literacy
(GL)
37 (52)
31
2
1
1
23
9
5
Responses
Like Self-Paced component
Strongly agree
Moderately agree
Neutral
Moderately disagree
Disagree
Compared to other sections
Much better
Better
No opinion
Not quite as good
Not good at all
Business
Literacy (BL)
78 (108)
37
23
9
7
2
21
21
28
7
1
The Feedback (cont)
 “really enjoying self-paced nature. With my schedule it
makes it much easier”
 “puts a lot of responsibility on the students…catch myself
doing it last minute…a good grade it’s easy to attain…a matter
of time management…”
 “Like doing the assignments in SAM not from book” & “I love
SAM!!! I hate SAM and the book together…” & “I love this
kind of learning method. All CISS 100 classes should use SAM
2007”
 “…wish training covered the whole project just not part…”
 “…love not having to go to class in order to learn…”
The Feedback (cont)
 “I like the way it works. …wasn’t so picky or would give a more
definitive answer to ones that are missed” & “SAM… is
temperamental…”
 “format of class is excellent; SAM site is not always the best to
work with…automated feedback on projects … obscure or
confusing leading to some degree of frustration instead rather
than learning”
 “Do not like this way of learning. .. Feel like I am failing in the
class because of the lack of one-on-one help. Yes, I can come to
class but that one period can only do so much since we do
everything outside of class. I’d rather have this be a lecture class
explaining in a clearer way what is in each chapter…”
The Feedback (cont)
 “…tutorials, case problems and quizzes are a bit of overkill. I
definitely know the material by the time I am done with each
section but can't help feeling like I've been asked the same
question four or five times. I think it could be toned back a
little bit and still learn the material well…”
 “…to me, all the materials for this course helps me learn in the
best possible way.”
 “…the material covered in SAM is not sufficient for the Case
Problems…. the instructions for Case Problems in the book are
really confusing and SAM explains them MUCH better…”
 “…assignments hard to complete on macbooks”
The Feedback - Unexpected learning
Quick feedback on the Case problem projects is helping me to
pay more attention to detail and reading instructions carefully
2010 - 87%
o
o
o
o
o
12 - strongly agree
8 - moderately agree
3 - neutral
0 - moderately disagree
0 - disagree
2011 – 72%
o
o
o
o
o
26 - strongly agree
29 - moderately agree
10 - neutral
3 - moderately disagree
8 - disagree
The Feedback - 2011 Preferred Method
Doing Case Problems in:
o 66 - SAM 85%
o 12 - Course book 15%
Using an eBook vs Paperbook:
o
o
o
o
o
9 - strongly agree
10 - moderately agree
19 - neutral
8 - moderately disagree
27 - disagree
26% preferred method
26% neutral
48% NOT preferred method
The Feedback - Where Did Coursework Occur?
General Literacy
o
o
o
o
o
4 - in the classroom
19 - in my dorm
6 - at home
0 - where I work
8 - computer labs on
campus
Business Literacy
o
o
o
o
o
6 - in the classroom
26 - in my dorm
13 - at home
1 - where I work
32 - computer labs on
campus
General Literacy TA Responsiveness/Helpfulness
Inquiries Outside of Class
o
o
o
o
3 - Poor
3 - Fair
8 - Good
23 - Excellent
During Classtime
o
o
o
o
2 - Poor
1 - Fair
11 - Good
23 - Excellent
During Tutoring Lab Time
o
o
o
o
2 - Poor
1 - Fair
11 - Good
22 - Excellent
Business Literacy TA Responsiveness/Helpfulness
Inquiries Outside of Class
o
o
o
o
5 - Poor
9 - Fair
27 - Good
37 - Excellent
During Classtime
o
o
o
o
2 - Poor
8 - Fair
28 - Good
39 - Excellent
During Tutoring Lab Time
o
o
o
o
2 - Poor
10 - Fair
27 - Good
39 - Excellent
General Literary Pre/Post-Test Results
Word - Positive increase - Highest grade 94%
 2010 Average increase 30% & 2011 Average increase 25%
Pre-Test Post-Test
2010
Pre-Test Post-Test
2011
49
47
Scale
48
42
Scale
0%
45%
>=80
0%
24%
>=80
4%
73%
>=70
4%
53%
>=70
12%
91%
>=60
8%
74%
>=60
84%
9%
< 60
88%
26%
< 60
2010 General Literacy Pre-Post Test Results
Excel
o Positive increase
o Highest Grade 84%
o Average increase
46%
Pre-Test Post-Test
51
40
Scale
0%
25%
>=70
0%
58%
>=60
2%
85%
>=50
98%
15%
< 50
2010 General Literacy Pre-Post Test Results
PowerPoint
o Positive increase
o Highest Grade 94%
o Average increase
29%
Pre-Test Post-Test
39
37
Scale
0%
54%
>=80
2%
84%
>=70
25%
95%
>=60
75%
5%
< 60
Student Classification
General Literacy
Business Literacy
o 18 Freshmen
o 7 Sophomore
o 6 Junior
o 6 Senior
o 39 Freshmen
o 28 Sophomore
o 9 Junior
o 1 Senior
The Next Phase - Fall 2011
 Six sections of General
Literacy
o Online format duplicated across
all sections
o 50 students per section
o Adjunct faculty facilitating
 Student orientation
 Monitor coursework
 Answer email
 Monitor/maintain
gradebook
 Student exceptions/makeup
work
o Tutoring labs with TAs
o Pre/Post Test monitored in lab
 Three large sections of
Business Literacy
o
o
o
o
Two faculty
50 – 60 students per section
One lab-assistant per section
Half of class attend one-dayper-week
o Scheduled Tutoring labs with
TAs
o Pre/Post Test monitored in
class
The Future
Questions to be answered
Outcomes
Course Organization
o Lab assistants
o Class size
o Tutoring Labs
Faculty Load/Administration
Questions?
Bill Jaber, PhD
bjaber@leeuniversity.edu
Mava Wilson, PhD
mwilson@leeuniversity.edu