Search News


Browse Archives

News

Sustainable Hybrids

September 22, 2009

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

The question of whether distance education is as effective as classroom education is hotly debated in academe and largely unanswered by existing studies. However, new research from South Texas College suggests that hybrid courses -- those that are offered online but also involve substantial face time -- can produce better outcomes than those that are delivered exclusively on the Web or in the classroom.

Researchers at the community college, led by Brenda S. Cole, analyzed the spring 2009 grades of every student enrolled there. The scholars' basis for assessing outcomes was straightforward: “A,” “B,” or “C” grades qualified as successful outcomes; “D” and “F” grades counted as unsuccessful.

The data showed that, over all, 82 percent of students of hybrid courses were successful, compared to 72 percent of classroom courses and 60 percent of distance courses.

These findings require some qualification, Cole said. When broken down by individual instructor, the data show no difference in the outcomes across the different delivery methods -- meaning that the overall figures do not account for the grading habits of particular instructors, which could be a confounding variable. (At the same time, the sample size for the instructor subgroup was too small to render statistically significant findings -- South Texas has offered hybrid courses only since 2006, and relatively few professors teach in all three modalities.)

Still, hybrid courses showed outcomes superior to distance and traditional courses when researchers controlled for other factors. Students who took all three types of courses generally performed best in the hybrid ones. And hybrid classes bested the other delivery methods in courses affiliated with the college’s business and technology, health, and liberal arts and social sciences programs. Only in the math and science and bachelor’s degree programs did traditional students do the best -- and hybrid-course students outperformed distance-education students in every instance.

Cole said the fact that this study was limited to the student population at South Texas -- which is large, predominantly Hispanic, and averages about 25 years old -- makes it difficult to argue that these findings say anything about hybrid-course outcomes broadly. However, they do align with a meta-analysis released several months ago by the U.S. Department of Education, which concluded that hybrid, or “blended,” courses could be more effective than either wholly Web- or classroom-based courses.

The advantages of hybrid courses over online-only ones are obvious, Cole said. Students and instructors are more accountable to one another, and students benefit from being able to talk to their professors in person. “Being able to ask a question, or say, ‘Hey could you do that again or explain that again?’ -- you can’t easily do that online,” she said, adding that she believes more rigorous research into the matter will reinforce her preliminary findings on this score.

The evidence suggesting that hybrid courses produce superior outcomes to traditional courses, she said, is more puzzling. “That’s just one of the questions that we haven’t answered yet that we intend to follow up on,” she said.

In any case, Cole said, how well students perform in a given course-delivery system is almost certainly tied to their individual needs. Students who require more prodding in order to get the work done probably perform better with the increased sense of accountability that comes with time in the classroom. Students who are more self-motivated, or those whose personal obligations cause them to benefit from maximum flexibility, might do best in courses that are exclusively online.

There is much more work to be done, Cole said. For one, the study assessed only how well students did in the courses, not how much they learned, which is much harder to determine. South Texas’ preliminary research into the question of hybrid outcomes merely satisfied the college’s question of whether it was an acceptable alternative to traditional and Web-only courses; whether it turns out the be the preferable alternative will be a question for subsequent studies to answer.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on Sustainable Hybrids

  • Hybrid superior to traditional
  • Posted by Michele at USC on September 22, 2009 at 1:15pm EDT
  • "The evidence suggesting that hybrid courses produce superior outcomes to traditional courses, she said, is more puzzling. “That’s just one of the questions that we haven’t answered yet that we intend to follow up on,” she said."

    Students are more engaged when there's an online component to a course through which they must create content (posting on a discussion board, for example), whereas in a traditional format classroom, they can be much more passive and disengaged (particularly in large classes). Given the popularity of the various technologies that allow mass authoring (social networking sites, Twitter, blogging, etc.), blended classes succeed by incorporating that element in which many of our students are already engaged outside the classroom.

    Also, the online component probably helps students "catch up" if and when they do miss a classroom meeting. For those hybrid models that have fewer classroom meetings over the term, I would also imagine that student attendance in the classroom is better--if a blended class meets once every two or three weeks versus 2-3 times a week, it is more likely a student will be sure to attend so as not to miss something, rather than feel they can "blow off" one or two lectures throughout the term.

  • it works from the teacher's side, too
  • Posted by data driven , researcher at accrediting agency on September 22, 2009 at 2:30pm EDT
  • As someone who used to teach hybrid (online/f2f) courses, I found that student evaluations reported the class format to be more challenging and more successful at target skill development than traditional f2f formats. As an educator, I was equally challenged - no more using my skills as a presenter and ex temp speaker to fill in where the class prep might be lacking (not that I ever did that, of course...!). The new format required me to be focused from Day 1 about my intended outcomes and goals, craft a curriculum that detailed the same, yet offered enough flexibility for the students to do some of their own constructive work. It was disorienting enough for me to dis-embed myself from my well-grooved habits and presumptions in the classroom and be a much more self-aware and intentional teacher. For the students, it offered them the chance to exercise new educational muscles in an equally disorienting format and helped them become more proactive learners. I'm not a true believer in exclusively online education, and I see the limits (and passiveness) of much f2f classroom work - but this experiment really worked.

  • findings in poli sci
  • Posted by rich Vengroff , Dean, Humanities and social sciences at Kennesaw State U on September 22, 2009 at 6:30pm EDT
  • I did a similar test with sophmore level political science courses (comparative politics). Teaching all three types, traditional class, hybrid and distance we compared student assessments of the classes and found the hybrid to receive stronger evaluations. We also found that the level of participation was greater and more consistent in the hybrid classes than in the traditional, even when specific discussion sections were organized weekly. The quality of the on-line discussions was quite good and provided a basis for well thought out discussions in class. Another advantage is the effective use of classroom resources, especially on off days like Fridays. One big problem however, limits the utility of this approach in resource stapped times, class size. Class size in hybrid courses, like distance education classes is generally limited to 25 or so students. When our average traditional classes enroll between 40 and 250 it is hard to justify hybrid and distance courses financially.

  • No Difference in Outcomes
  • Posted by Robert Leopard , Biology Instructor at Monroe Community College on September 23, 2009 at 12:15pm EDT
  • Cole's statement "When broken down by individual instructor, the data show no difference in the outcomes across the different delivery methods" means that hybrid did not deliver better results.

    What I've seen of hybrid math and anatomy classes is that students consider them to be the worst of both worlds. They don't get lectures (recognizing that it's more work on their own) and they still have to come to class.

    I believe that adding an online component, as opposed to replacing class time, can provide all the purported benefits of hybrid courses.

  • Hybrid courses
  • Posted by Jose R. Sanchez , Associate Professor at Long Island Unversity on September 27, 2009 at 11:45pm EDT
  • I use Blackboard in all of my courses. I, and my students, like it primarily because it creates more contact between me and them and between the students. It does create a more active learning experience. The biggest problem is start up. Students always have difficulties getting online at the beginning of the semester and it is not always their fault. Some also have inadequate computers at home and/or slow internet connections. While I use Blackboard, I know that the university is not making money with hybrids. They want to and, as a result, will try to push eventually for full online courses. So, though hybrids work, such courses are not economically viable for a lot of my students and for the administration. In the end, hybrid courses simply give faculty more tools for motivating and keeping students involved. They involve more work for the faculty and for the students. That's why they may produce better outcomes.