Friday, March 29, 2024

GOODIES TO GO! ™
May 17, 1999 — Newsletter #28

***********************************************************
GOODIES TO GO! ™
May 17, 1999 — Newsletter #28
***********************************************************
Please visit http://www.htmlgoodies.com
***********************************************************


Greetings, Weekend Silicon Warriors…


Well, the semester for me has come to an end. I have one
more get together with students to watch the class’s final
video projects, but past that… I’m done for the summer.
I once saw a plaque that read “The best part of being a
teacher is June, July and August.” Amen.


Since the semester is over, that also means that my On-Line
HTML class is over. I wrote a newsletter about it a good
two months back. I wrote that I would let you know the
results when they came in. They’re in.


Just to refresh your memory, the class was a seven-week
course devoted to teaching HTML, some CSS, and a little
JavaScript. Page design was intertwined into the program
rather than being a topic I specifically devoted time
toward. The entire class was on-line. All homework, all
tests, all assignments were done on-line. I didn’t even
know what most of the students looked like until I threw
a party at the end of the first seven weeks. It was very
weird having strangers show up at your door, then
realizing you’ve been their teacher for the past two months.


The class was set up as an experiment. There were to be an
equal amount of students taking the class on-line as
students taking the class with me in the traditional, twice-
a-week class periods. Of course, some students dropped out
and that changed the numbers a bit. Both groups followed the
exact same format, took the exact same homework, did the
exact same assignments, and followed the exact same
deadlines.


I was able to teach two sessions of the class over the
course of the traditional 16-week semester.


The first seven weeks had 17 in class and 18 on-line. The
in-class students were all traditional college-aged students,
while the on-line students were continuing education
students. Their lowest age was 27. The highest age was in
the 50s. She wouldn’t say exactly.


The second seven weeks had 15 in class and 17 on-line. All
were traditional college-aged students.


For you quantitative research buffs, the students were not
randomly placed but rather chose the class they wished to
take. I was not allowed to have them placed due to
university policy. Thus, this must be called a “case study”
rather than a “controlled experiment.”


Here’s how the final grades all panned out. Percentages are
an average of all the students’ final percentages. I know
it’s not the best measure, but I’m just getting started
crunching the data.


First Seven Weeks In-Class: 93%


First Seven Weeks On-Line: 96%


2nd Seven Weeks In-Class: 90%


2nd Seven Weeks On-Line: 89%



The numbers are pretty representative, actually. The grades
all plotted pretty close. There was only one real out-lier
(an out-lier is a score that differs greatly from the rest
of the scores). Say the entire class gets an “A.” One kid
gets an “F.” He’s a blatant out-lier and shouldn’t be
figured into the percentage as that score would give a false
impression of the class performance.


So, young grasshopper, what can we tell from just these
numbers?


If the grades seem a little high to you, they did to me,
too; however, the e-mail I got throughout the semester was
very positive and students gave me the impression they
really enjoyed working on the class. I enjoyed teaching it,
too.


I should also say that I often looked the other way when
assignments were late. The school computer system is buggy
and sometimes did mess up the students’ work. Rather than
investigating each case, I allowed a reasonable amount of
work to be handed in late.


It appears as if college-aged students do a little better
in a class setting. I assumed this would be somewhat the
case. There are just too many distractions in the dorm
halls. I don’t like that the second seven weeks in-class
group had a lower score than the first seven-week group.
Those were the two groups that remained the same over the
two courses. I know it’s only three percentage points, but
it still bugs me. I also don’t like that the percentage went
down. It’s just the teacher in me, I guess.


The seven-point percentage drop between the two on-line
classes is very telling. Maybe the thought of on-line courses
should be geared more toward an older group of students, as
they might have the self-discipline to make time for the
assignments.


I sent out a survey to both on-line classes. I was able to
read the results a class period before the semester ended.
Now, I’m really just getting started plotting out the
responses, but I got a general feeling that many of the
college-aged kids took the course so they wouldn’t have to
attend class. The continuing education group sited reasons
like wanting to learn the subject matter or wanting to help
themselves in their work.


The college-aged students reported that they did the
homework and read the lessons either later at night or “when
they had time.” Many of them claimed that was the beauty of
the class. The continuing education students showed a much
more structured time frame.


The continuing education students sought each other out and
formed a network. They ran assignments past the group and
tried to solve problems within their class. I asked the
college-aged kids if they had formed any bonds. Most said
they had with one or two others in the class, but nothing
like the network the continuing education students set up.


Both groups of students had people reporting that their
stress level was higher taking an on-line class. Both groups
had students saying their stress level was lower. It looks
like stress might change person to person rather than being
something you can predict due to age.


I asked if any of the students had cheated by having other
students do the work for them, or looking at source codes
for homework answers. The answer came back a resounding
“No!” I believe them. They all did very well on their final
Web pages and deserved the high grades they pulled.


The most interesting thing about the survey was the way the
students suggested I better the class. I set the class up,
on purpose, so that the only way the student could get to
me was through e-mail or by phone. I wanted the student to
have the feeling that they were on their own. I knew some
of the on-line college kids. I told them they weren’t even
allowed into my office. They took that very seriously. I
think they enjoyed the contest of it as much as I did.


Well, now that the class is over I’ve started looking at
the survey questionnaires where I ask how I could have made
the class better. The answers differ, but most basically
pointed in the same direction.


“A chat room would have been useful.”


“Set up a time when we could be sure you would read and
answer our e-mail.”


“Set up a newsgroup so we could ask questions and you could
answer them.”

These answers came from both groups. I think it’s pretty
straightforward. They want a voice of authority and someone
who has all the answers. They want to be able to raise their
hands and have a problem solved. They want to be taught.


They want a teacher.


So, is Web-based teaching a winner? Well, I’m only dealing
with preliminary results, but I think to the right kind of
student, yes. The people obviously learned. They got good
grades and most reported to me that they enjoyed the class.
Even so, I got the feeling that a teacher would have been
a whole lot better than a box that displayed the text.


Maybe more interactivity. Maybe more images. Maybe less
information in a longer period of time. Maybe a chat room.
Maybe streaming video. Maybe, maybe, maybe.


Maybe the classroom ain’t broke so I shouldn’t be trying to
fix it.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


And that’s that. Again, thank you so much for reading this
every week. I really appreciate it.


Joe Burns, Ph.D.


And Remember: Ever heard of Admiral Josephus “Joe” Daniels?
He barred the serving of alcohol on Navy ships. The crew
had to drink something and coffee was pretty cheap, thus
the phrase “Cup of Joe.”

Archive Home Page.

Get the Free Newsletter!

Subscribe to Developer Insider for top news, trends & analysis

Popular Articles

Featured