1.
Samantha Pattridge
Hannah Peters
Analysis of UFV Student Learning Patterns:
Ratio of Instructor-Directed (In-Class) to Independent
(Out-of-Class) Time Spent on Learning Activities

2.
• Introductions
• Project details
• Findings
• Implications and discussion

3.
Discipline-specific (e.g. Bonesronning & Opstad, 2012; Bower, 2012; Scully &
Kerr, 2014; Ruiz-Gallardo, Castano, Gomez-Alday & Valdes, 2011)
Student perceptions of workload (e.g. Kyndt et al 2014; Myers
& Thorn 2013; Mottet, Parker-Raley, Beebe & Cunningham, 2007; Kember & Leung, 1996, 2006)
General time use (e.g. Welker & Wadzuk, 2012; Kingsland, 1996
US Bureau of Labor
Statistics: 1.53
hours/day
Maclean’s: 10.39 to
19.96 hours/week

4.
Survey Details
• Ethics approval
• Structure:
• Pilot followed by full study
• Two surveys per term
• Faculty survey
• Classes surveyed n=44

5.
Overall Findings
• Survey 1 mean: 4.63 hours/week
• Survey 2 mean: 5.16 hours/week
14
79
122
102
92
75
49
18
27
9
21
40
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 More
Number of respondents
Number of Hours
Total Reported Hours per Week across All Courses Surveyed:
Survey 1
6
32
72
91
68
56
38
20
24
16
25
49
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 More
Number of Respondents
Number of Hours
Total Reported Hours across All Courses Surveyed: Survey 2

6.
Findings by Faculty
5.47
6.11
4.77
6.30 6.13
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Health Humanities Professional
Studies
Science Social
Science
Average Hours per Week Reported

7.
Findings by Delivery Format
• Poor response rate from
online and hybrid (n=32)
• 7 of 19 sections
represented
• Mean of average hours
per week: 7.3 hours

8.
Findings by Student Year
5.38
4.52 4.50
5.41
6.22
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
0 to 30 30 to 60 60 to 90 90 to 120 120+
Average Number of Hours Reported
Number of Credits: Student Year of Study
Hours per week

9.
Faculty Expectations vs. Student Reports
0
2
8
7
5
1 1
7
0
2
0
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 More
Number of Faculty Respondents
Hours Expected
Faculty Expectations of Time Spent Outside Class

10.
Faculty Expectations vs. Student Reports
6
32
72
91
68
56
38
20 24
16
25
49
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 More
Number of Respondents
Number of Hours
Total Reported Hours across All Courses Surveyed: Survey 2

11.
1. Did any results in this
study surprise you? Why?
2. Considering the amount
of time students report
spending on course work
outside class each week,
how do you think you
might adjust your
syllabus, expectations, or
instructions?
Small Group Discussion
3. What are the institutional policy and practice implications
of the findings?

12.
Moving Forward
• Further data analysis
• Discussions with curriculum
committees and faculty
councils
• Continuation of the study
• ???

13.
Contact
Hannah Peters
hannaholiviapeters21@gmail.com
Samantha Pattridge
Associate Professor
Samantha.Pattridge@ufv.ca

14.
References
• Babcock, P. S., Marks, M. (2010). Leisure College USA: the decline in
student study time. Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute.
• Bonesronning, H., Opstad, L. (2012). How much is students’ college
performance affected by quantity of study? International Review of
Economics Education, 11(2), 46-63.
• Bower, K. (2012). A model of student workload. Journal of Higher
Education Policy and Management, 34(3), 239-258, DOI:
10.1080/1360080X.2012.678729
• Burke, L., Amselem, M.C., & Hall, J. (2016). Big debt, little study: What
taxpayers should know about college students’ time use. Report on
Education. The Heritage Foundation. Retrieved from
http://www.heritage.org/education/report/big-debt-little-study-what-
taxpayers-should-know-about-college-students-time-use

15.
• Kember, D. (2004). Interpreting student workload and the factors
which shape students’ perceptions of their workload. Studies in
Higher Education, 29(2), 165-184, DOI:
10.1080/0307507042000190778
• Kember, D., Ng, S., Tse, H., Wong, E. T. T., & Pomfret, M. (1996) An
examination of the interrelationships between workload, study
time, learning approaches and academic outcomes. Studies in
Higher Education, 21(3), 347-358, DOI:
10.1080/03075079612331381261
• Kyndt, E., Berghmans, I., Dochy, F. & Bulckens, D. (2014). Time is
not enough. Workload in higher education: A student perspective.
Higher Education Research & Development, 33(4), 684-698, DOI:
10.1080/07294360.2013.863839
• McCormick, A. (2011). It’s about time: What to make of reported
declined in how much college students study. Liberal Education,
97(1), 30-39.
• Mottet, T. P., Parker-Raley, J., Beebe, S. A., & Cunningham, C.
(2007). Instructors who resist "college lite": The neutralizing
effect of instructor immediacy on students' course-workload
violations and perceptions of instructor credibility and affective
learning. Communication Education, 56(2), 145-167. DOI:
10.1080/03634520601164259

16.
• Myers, S. A., & Thorn, K. (2013). The relationship between students’
motives to communicate with their instructors, course effort, and
course workload. College Student Journal, 47(3), 485-488.
• Ruiz-Gallardo, J. R., Castaño, S., Gómez-Alday, J. J., & Valdés, A. (2011).
Assessing student workload in Problem Based Learning: Relationships
among teaching method, student workload and achievement. A case
study in Natural Sciences. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(11), 619-
627, DOI: 10.1016/j.tate.2010.11.001
• Schwartz, J. (2016). Where students study the most 2016. Macleans.
Retrieved from http://www.macleans.ca/education/where-students-
study-the-most-full-results/.
• Scully, G., & Kerr, R. (2014). Student workload and assessment:
Strategies to manage expectations and inform curriculum development.
Accounting Education, 23(5), 443-466.
doi:10.1080/09639284.2014.947094

17.
• Silva, E., White, T., Toch, T., & Carnegie Foundation for the
Advancement of Teaching. (2015). The Carnegie Unit: A century-
old standard in a changing education landscape. Carnegie
Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching
• Wellman, J., & Ehrlich, T. (2003). The credit hour: The tie that
binds. New Directions for Higher Education, (122), 119-122.
• Welker, A. L., & Wadzuk, B. (2012). How students spend their
time. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education &
Practice, 138(3), 198-206. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)EI.1943-
5541.0000105