Sp110811

346 views

Published on

An institutional study of the influence of ‘onlineness’ on student evaluation of teaching in a dual mode Australian university

Published in: Education, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
346
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Sp110811

  1. 1. An institutional study of the influence of‘onlineness’ on student evaluation ofteaching in a dual mode Australianuniversity Stuart Palmer @s_palm . Institute of Teaching and Learning Deakin University #spalmer
  2. 2. Systematic influences on SET dataThe literature says…Class size – negatively correlated;Year level – positively correlated; andDiscipline area - variousIn more recent times, rapid expansion of online learning
  3. 3. Student evaluation of teaching & units (SETU)1. This unit was well taught2. The course materials in this unit were of high quality3. The workload in this unit was manageable4. Requirements for completing the assessment tasks in this unit were clear5. The teaching staff gave me helpful feedback6. The library resources met my needs for this unit7. I would recommend this unit to other students8. The technologies used to deliver the online content in this unit performed satisfactorily9. The on-line teaching and resources in this unit enhanced my learning experience10. This unit challenged me to learnn/a; 1=strongly disagree; 2=disagree; 3=neutral; 4=agree; 5=strongly agree
  4. 4. Data set used in studyMean SETU rating sets for 1432 units of studyRepresenting 74498 individual sets of SETU ratings58.5 % of all units listed in the Deakin Universityhandbook for the period under consideration
  5. 5. SETU items relating to onlineness 5Mean SETU rating - item 9 4 r2 = 0.73 3 p = 0.0000 2 1 1 2 3 4 5 Mean SETU rating - item 8
  6. 6. Class size 4.00 Mean SETU rating - item 8 3.95 F = 0.885 p > 0.41 3.90 3.85 n < 51 50 < n < 101 n > 100 No Sig. Diff. 3.85 Mean SETU rating - item 9 3.80 F = 3.199 3.75 p > 0.041 No Sig. Diff. 3.70 n < 51 50 < n < 101 n > 100
  7. 7. Year level 4.10 Mean SETU rating - item 8 4.05 4.00 3.95 F = 8.972 p < 0.0002 3.90 3.85 3.80 Early Later Postgrad Sig. Diff. 3.90 Mean SETU rating - item 9 3.85 3.80 F = 16.515 p < 1x10-7 3.75 3.70 3.65 Sig. Diff. 3.60 Early Later Postgrad
  8. 8. Discipline area 4.10 Mean SETU rating - item 8 4.05 4.00 3.95 F = 11.998 p < 2x10-7 3.90 3.85 3.80 Arts/Ed Bus/Law Sci/Tech Health Sig. Diff. 4.00 3.95 Mean SETU rating - item 9 3.90 3.85 F = 21.177 p < 4x10-13 3.80 3.75 3.70 3.65 Sig. Diff. 3.60 Arts/Ed Sci/Tech Bus/Law Health
  9. 9. Online mode of offer 4.00 Mean SETU rating - item 1 3.90 3.80 F = 18.266 3.70 p < 0.0003 3.60 Conventional Wholly online Sig. Diff. 4.00 Mean SETU rating - item 7 3.90 3.80 F = 22.350 p < 3x10-6 3.70 3.60 3.50 Sig. Diff. 3.40 Conventional Wholly online
  10. 10. SETU and wholly online units1. *This unit was well taught2. The course materials in this unit were of high quality3. The workload in this unit was manageable4. Requirements for completing the assessment tasks in this unit were clear5. The teaching staff gave me helpful feedback6. The library resources met my needs for this unit7. *I would recommend this unit to other students8. The technologies used to deliver the online content in this unit performed satisfactorily9. *The on-line teaching and resources in this unit enhanced my learning experience10. This unit challenged me to learn* Reported to university Council
  11. 11. Case study – SEB221 4.25 2003Mean SETU rating 3.75 (n=51, 17%) 2004 (n=73, 42%) 3.25 2005 (n=47, 32%) 2006 2.75 (n=32, 37%) 1 7 9 SETU item
  12. 12. Case study – SEB221 4.25 2003Mean SETU rating 3.75 (n=51, 17%) 2004 (n=73, 42%) 3.25 2005 (n=47, 32%) 2006 2.75 (n=32, 37%) 1 7 9 SETU item
  13. 13. Case study – SEB221 4.25 2003Mean SETU rating 3.75 (n=51, 17%) 2004 (n=73, 42%) 3.25 2005 (n=47, 32%) 2006 2.75 (n=32, 37%) 1 7 9 SETU item
  14. 14. ConclusionsMean ratings for the two ‘online’ SETU items (item 8 – ‘The technologiesused to deliver the online content in this unit performed satisfactorily’ and item 9– ‘The on-line teaching and resources in this unit enhanced my learningexperience’) are strongly, significantly and positively correlatedComparing units offered in wholly online mode to units offered in all othermodes, mean ratings for SETU items 1 ‘this unit was well taught’ and 7 ‘I wouldrecommend this unit to other students’ were both significantly lower forwholly online units
  15. 15. ConclusionsClass size had no significant influence on either SETU item 8 or item 9Mean ratings for SETU items 8 and 9 are significantly and positively relatedto the enrolled year level of the respondent, based on the groupings of ‘earlyyears’ (first & second years), ‘later years’ (third & later years) and ‘postgraduate’(programs beyond undergrad level)Mean ratings for SETU items 8 and 9 are significantly different betweenFaculties – with the Faculty of Health having the highest mean rating for bothitems
  16. 16. Thank you for your time http://myqr.co/zJrD Presentation

×