Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
Comparative & non-comparative study evaluation Done for:  D.Alaa Sadik Done by:   Siham Al -Omairi(67157) Asmahan Albulush...
Study title: Comp:  Comparative Analysis of Learner Satisfaction and Learner Outcomes in Online and  Face –to- Face Learni...
Purpose of the evaluation <ul><li>Comp:   The primary purpose of this study was to  compare   an online course with an   e...
comparative study:  Questions <ul><li>What differences exist in satisfaction with the learning experience of students   en...
Non-comparative study: Questions <ul><li>1. How are the three motivational components related to </li></ul><ul><li>the com...
Participant of studies  <ul><li>Non-comp:   173 seventh-grade students from eight science and seven English classrooms fro...
comparative study instrument: <ul><li>(ICES):   university’s  Instructor and Course Evaluation System  was   used to obtai...
Non-comparative study instrument: MSLQ : the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire was used to measure students'...
Advantages of studies:  <ul><li>Comp:  1-llustrate the findings by the tables of statistics. </li></ul><ul><li>Non-comp:  ...
Disadvantages of studies: <ul><li>Comp :  1-donot provide  the enough information about participant.   </li></ul><ul><li>N...
comparative study: Result <ul><li>On the student satisfaction indicators, instructor quality and course quality, both grou...
Non-comparative study: Result <ul><li>The second research question concerned the potential interactions between the motiva...
Resources: <ul><li>Non-comp:  http://www.stanford.edu/dept/SUSE/projects/ireport/articles/self-regulation/self-regulated%2...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Ppt Comparitive1

1,599 views

Published on

comparative and non-comparative

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Ppt Comparitive1

  1. 1. Comparative & non-comparative study evaluation Done for: D.Alaa Sadik Done by: Siham Al -Omairi(67157) Asmahan Albulushi (68702)
  2. 2. Study title: Comp: Comparative Analysis of Learner Satisfaction and Learner Outcomes in Online and Face –to- Face Learning Environment Non-com: Motivational and Self-Regulated Learning Components of Classroom Academic Performance
  3. 3. Purpose of the evaluation <ul><li>Comp: The primary purpose of this study was to compare an online course with an equivalent course taught in a traditional face-to - face format. (Learners perception and performance study ) </li></ul><ul><li>Non-com: One purpose of this study was to examine and clarify the empirical relations between the motivational and self-regulated learning components. </li></ul>
  4. 4. comparative study: Questions <ul><li>What differences exist in satisfaction with the learning experience of students enrolled in online versus face-to-face learning environments? </li></ul><ul><li>2. What differences exist in student perceptions of student/instructor interaction, course structure, and course support between students enrolled in online versus face-to-face learning environments? </li></ul><ul><li>3. What differences exist in the learning outcomes (i.e., perceived content knowledge, quality of course projects, and final course grades) of students enrolled in online versus face-to-face learning environments? </li></ul>
  5. 5. Non-comparative study: Questions <ul><li>1. How are the three motivational components related to </li></ul><ul><li>the components of self-regulated learning? </li></ul><ul><li>2. What are the interactions among the three motivational </li></ul><ul><li>components and their relation to the self-regulated learning components? </li></ul><ul><li>3. How are the motivational and self-regulated learning </li></ul><ul><li>components related to student performance on classroom academic tasks? </li></ul>
  6. 6. Participant of studies <ul><li>Non-comp: 173 seventh-grade students from eight science and seven English classrooms from a predominantly White, middleclass, small city school district in south eastern Michigan. </li></ul><ul><li>Comp : 19 students were enrolled in the online </li></ul><ul><li>version of the course. </li></ul><ul><li>19 students, most of whom are pursuing </li></ul><ul><li>a graduate degree in Human Resource </li></ul><ul><li>Development (HRD), were enrolled </li></ul><ul><li>in the on-campus course. </li></ul>
  7. 7. comparative study instrument: <ul><li>(ICES): university’s Instructor and Course Evaluation System was used to obtain general student perceptions of the quality of their learning experience. </li></ul><ul><li>(DOLES) Distance and Open Learning Scale and the (DDE) Dimensions of Distance Education instruments were identified as appropriate starting points for the creation of an assessment tool for online instruction. </li></ul><ul><li>CISS Course Interaction, Structure, and Support was used to establish the construct validity of the hybrid instrument. </li></ul>
  8. 8. Non-comparative study instrument: MSLQ : the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire was used to measure students' motivational beliefs and self-regulated learning.
  9. 9. Advantages of studies: <ul><li>Comp: 1-llustrate the findings by the tables of statistics. </li></ul><ul><li>Non-comp: 1-using more than one instruments </li></ul><ul><li>2- explain each result and prove it. </li></ul><ul><li>3- provide enough explanation about the </li></ul><ul><li>instrument that is used in the study. </li></ul>
  10. 10. Disadvantages of studies: <ul><li>Comp : 1-donot provide the enough information about participant. </li></ul><ul><li>Non-comp : 1- using only one instrument </li></ul>
  11. 11. comparative study: Result <ul><li>On the student satisfaction indicators, instructor quality and course quality, both groups provided positive ratings, although the face-to-face group displayed more positive views than the online group. </li></ul><ul><li>Both groups of students had positive perceptions, with the face-to-face students having significantly more positive views for interaction and support. </li></ul><ul><li>Students enrolled in the face-to-face course had a more favourable opinion of the amount and type of interactions among the students. </li></ul>
  12. 12. Non-comparative study: Result <ul><li>The second research question concerned the potential interactions between the motivational variables on the two cognitive scales. </li></ul><ul><li>The third research question concerned how the motivational and cognitive variables were related to student performance. </li></ul><ul><li>The study displays the zero-order correlations for the motivational, cognitive, and performance variables. </li></ul>
  13. 13. Resources: <ul><li>Non-comp: http://www.stanford.edu/dept/SUSE/projects/ireport/articles/self-regulation/self-regulated%20learning-motivation.pdf </li></ul><ul><li>Comp: </li></ul><ul><li>http:// www.editlib.org/index.cfm?fuseaction = Reader.ViewFullText&paper_id =8371 </li></ul>

×