Grade Performance of Face‐to‐Face Versus Online Agricultural Economics Students
Online course offerings have been growing at a rapid pace in post‐secondary education. An ordered probit model is estimated to analyze the effects of online vs. face‐to‐face course format in achieving specific letter grades. An upper‐division agricultural economics course taught over 9 years using b...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Natural sciences education 2014-12, Vol.43 (1), p.57-63 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 63 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 1 |
| container_start_page | 57 |
| container_title | Natural sciences education |
| container_volume | 43 |
| creator | Greenway, Gina A. Makus, Larry D. |
| description | Online course offerings have been growing at a rapid pace in post‐secondary education. An ordered probit model is estimated to analyze the effects of online vs. face‐to‐face course format in achieving specific letter grades. An upper‐division agricultural economics course taught over 9 years using both formats is used for the analysis. For a sample of 81 students, variables of grade point average, number of credit hours taken, verbal SAT score, gender, course format, and major were used to predict final score in the course. Results indicate that online students performed better than face‐to‐face students at a marginal significance level. Online students were 2% less likely to earn a D in the course, and 15% less likely to earn a C in the course than their face‐to‐face counterparts. Online students were 8%t more likely to earn a B in the course and 9% more likely to earn an A in the course than face‐to‐face students. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.4195/nse2013.05.0013 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_1549956081</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>EJ1026452</ericid><sourcerecordid>3388925391</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1913-4382012921916173550f707c4e9a6034c66f60f265cebed6f82bff602013fd6c3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFUFFLwzAQDqLgmHv2SQj43C1Jm6x9EcbopjKcUPU1dOlFOrpmJi2yN3-Cv9FfYmqH-OZB7r7kvrvLfQhdUjKOaMIntQNGaDgmfEx8PEEDRkUcxCymp3_wORo5tyXeYk4TRgYoW9q8APwIVhu7y2sF2Gi8yBV8fXw2xrsO4xewrnV4XVdlDXj2akvVVk1r8wqnytRmVyqHs6YtoG7cBTrTeeVgdIxD9LxIn-a3wWq9vJvPVoGiCQ2DKIz9n1nC_E3Qacg50VMyVREkuSBhpITQgmgmuIINFELHbKP9S7eoLoQKh-i677u35q0F18itaW3tR0rKoyThgsTUsyY9S1njnAUt97bc5fYgKZGdePIoniRcduL5iqu-Avyav-z0nhImIs58_qbPv5cVHP5rJx-ylHXHY8J_BnwDEiF-Dw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1549956081</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Grade Performance of Face‐to‐Face Versus Online Agricultural Economics Students</title><source>Wiley Online Library - AutoHoldings Journals</source><creator>Greenway, Gina A. ; Makus, Larry D.</creator><creatorcontrib>Greenway, Gina A. ; Makus, Larry D.</creatorcontrib><description>Online course offerings have been growing at a rapid pace in post‐secondary education. An ordered probit model is estimated to analyze the effects of online vs. face‐to‐face course format in achieving specific letter grades. An upper‐division agricultural economics course taught over 9 years using both formats is used for the analysis. For a sample of 81 students, variables of grade point average, number of credit hours taken, verbal SAT score, gender, course format, and major were used to predict final score in the course. Results indicate that online students performed better than face‐to‐face students at a marginal significance level. Online students were 2% less likely to earn a D in the course, and 15% less likely to earn a C in the course than their face‐to‐face counterparts. Online students were 8%t more likely to earn a B in the course and 9% more likely to earn an A in the course than face‐to‐face students.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2168-8281</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 2168-8273</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2168-8281</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.4195/nse2013.05.0013</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Madison: American Society of Agronomy</publisher><subject>Academic Ability ; Academic Achievement ; Advanced Courses ; Agricultural economics ; Agricultural Education ; College Credits ; College Entrance Examinations ; College Students ; Comparative Analysis ; Conventional Instruction ; Distance learning ; Economics ; Economics Education ; Electronic Learning ; Futures ; Gender ; Gender Differences ; Grade Point Average ; Grades (Scholastic) ; In Person Learning ; Intellectual Disciplines ; Learning Modules ; Majors (Students) ; Methods Courses ; Online Courses ; Online instruction ; Options trading ; Personality Traits ; Predictor Variables ; Probability ; Production functions ; Productivity ; SAT (College Admission Test) ; Scores ; Secondary Education ; Statistical Analysis ; Students ; Studies ; Teacher Education Curriculum ; Variables</subject><ispartof>Natural sciences education, 2014-12, Vol.43 (1), p.57-63</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2014 by the American Society of Agronomy</rights><rights>Copyright American Society of Agronomy Jul 2014</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1913-4382012921916173550f707c4e9a6034c66f60f265cebed6f82bff602013fd6c3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1913-4382012921916173550f707c4e9a6034c66f60f265cebed6f82bff602013fd6c3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.4195%2Fnse2013.05.0013$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.4195%2Fnse2013.05.0013$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>315,781,785,1418,27929,27930,45579,45580</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ1026452$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Greenway, Gina A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Makus, Larry D.</creatorcontrib><title>Grade Performance of Face‐to‐Face Versus Online Agricultural Economics Students</title><title>Natural sciences education</title><description>Online course offerings have been growing at a rapid pace in post‐secondary education. An ordered probit model is estimated to analyze the effects of online vs. face‐to‐face course format in achieving specific letter grades. An upper‐division agricultural economics course taught over 9 years using both formats is used for the analysis. For a sample of 81 students, variables of grade point average, number of credit hours taken, verbal SAT score, gender, course format, and major were used to predict final score in the course. Results indicate that online students performed better than face‐to‐face students at a marginal significance level. Online students were 2% less likely to earn a D in the course, and 15% less likely to earn a C in the course than their face‐to‐face counterparts. Online students were 8%t more likely to earn a B in the course and 9% more likely to earn an A in the course than face‐to‐face students.</description><subject>Academic Ability</subject><subject>Academic Achievement</subject><subject>Advanced Courses</subject><subject>Agricultural economics</subject><subject>Agricultural Education</subject><subject>College Credits</subject><subject>College Entrance Examinations</subject><subject>College Students</subject><subject>Comparative Analysis</subject><subject>Conventional Instruction</subject><subject>Distance learning</subject><subject>Economics</subject><subject>Economics Education</subject><subject>Electronic Learning</subject><subject>Futures</subject><subject>Gender</subject><subject>Gender Differences</subject><subject>Grade Point Average</subject><subject>Grades (Scholastic)</subject><subject>In Person Learning</subject><subject>Intellectual Disciplines</subject><subject>Learning Modules</subject><subject>Majors (Students)</subject><subject>Methods Courses</subject><subject>Online Courses</subject><subject>Online instruction</subject><subject>Options trading</subject><subject>Personality Traits</subject><subject>Predictor Variables</subject><subject>Probability</subject><subject>Production functions</subject><subject>Productivity</subject><subject>SAT (College Admission Test)</subject><subject>Scores</subject><subject>Secondary Education</subject><subject>Statistical Analysis</subject><subject>Students</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Teacher Education Curriculum</subject><subject>Variables</subject><issn>2168-8281</issn><issn>2168-8273</issn><issn>2168-8281</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNqFUFFLwzAQDqLgmHv2SQj43C1Jm6x9EcbopjKcUPU1dOlFOrpmJi2yN3-Cv9FfYmqH-OZB7r7kvrvLfQhdUjKOaMIntQNGaDgmfEx8PEEDRkUcxCymp3_wORo5tyXeYk4TRgYoW9q8APwIVhu7y2sF2Gi8yBV8fXw2xrsO4xewrnV4XVdlDXj2akvVVk1r8wqnytRmVyqHs6YtoG7cBTrTeeVgdIxD9LxIn-a3wWq9vJvPVoGiCQ2DKIz9n1nC_E3Qacg50VMyVREkuSBhpITQgmgmuIINFELHbKP9S7eoLoQKh-i677u35q0F18itaW3tR0rKoyThgsTUsyY9S1njnAUt97bc5fYgKZGdePIoniRcduL5iqu-Avyav-z0nhImIs58_qbPv5cVHP5rJx-ylHXHY8J_BnwDEiF-Dw</recordid><startdate>201412</startdate><enddate>201412</enddate><creator>Greenway, Gina A.</creator><creator>Makus, Larry D.</creator><general>American Society of Agronomy</general><scope>7SW</scope><scope>BJH</scope><scope>BNH</scope><scope>BNI</scope><scope>BNJ</scope><scope>BNO</scope><scope>ERI</scope><scope>PET</scope><scope>REK</scope><scope>WWN</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88B</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8AF</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>CJNVE</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M0P</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PQEDU</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0X</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201412</creationdate><title>Grade Performance of Face‐to‐Face Versus Online Agricultural Economics Students</title><author>Greenway, Gina A. ; Makus, Larry D.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c1913-4382012921916173550f707c4e9a6034c66f60f265cebed6f82bff602013fd6c3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Academic Ability</topic><topic>Academic Achievement</topic><topic>Advanced Courses</topic><topic>Agricultural economics</topic><topic>Agricultural Education</topic><topic>College Credits</topic><topic>College Entrance Examinations</topic><topic>College Students</topic><topic>Comparative Analysis</topic><topic>Conventional Instruction</topic><topic>Distance learning</topic><topic>Economics</topic><topic>Economics Education</topic><topic>Electronic Learning</topic><topic>Futures</topic><topic>Gender</topic><topic>Gender Differences</topic><topic>Grade Point Average</topic><topic>Grades (Scholastic)</topic><topic>In Person Learning</topic><topic>Intellectual Disciplines</topic><topic>Learning Modules</topic><topic>Majors (Students)</topic><topic>Methods Courses</topic><topic>Online Courses</topic><topic>Online instruction</topic><topic>Options trading</topic><topic>Personality Traits</topic><topic>Predictor Variables</topic><topic>Probability</topic><topic>Production functions</topic><topic>Productivity</topic><topic>SAT (College Admission Test)</topic><topic>Scores</topic><topic>Secondary Education</topic><topic>Statistical Analysis</topic><topic>Students</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Teacher Education Curriculum</topic><topic>Variables</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Greenway, Gina A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Makus, Larry D.</creatorcontrib><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Ovid)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>ERIC( SilverPlatter )</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC PlusText (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Education Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>STEM Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Materials Science & Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Education Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Database</collection><collection>Education Database</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Education</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><jtitle>Natural sciences education</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Greenway, Gina A.</au><au>Makus, Larry D.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ1026452</ericid><atitle>Grade Performance of Face‐to‐Face Versus Online Agricultural Economics Students</atitle><jtitle>Natural sciences education</jtitle><date>2014-12</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>43</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>57</spage><epage>63</epage><pages>57-63</pages><issn>2168-8281</issn><issn>2168-8273</issn><eissn>2168-8281</eissn><abstract>Online course offerings have been growing at a rapid pace in post‐secondary education. An ordered probit model is estimated to analyze the effects of online vs. face‐to‐face course format in achieving specific letter grades. An upper‐division agricultural economics course taught over 9 years using both formats is used for the analysis. For a sample of 81 students, variables of grade point average, number of credit hours taken, verbal SAT score, gender, course format, and major were used to predict final score in the course. Results indicate that online students performed better than face‐to‐face students at a marginal significance level. Online students were 2% less likely to earn a D in the course, and 15% less likely to earn a C in the course than their face‐to‐face counterparts. Online students were 8%t more likely to earn a B in the course and 9% more likely to earn an A in the course than face‐to‐face students.</abstract><cop>Madison</cop><pub>American Society of Agronomy</pub><doi>10.4195/nse2013.05.0013</doi><tpages>7</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 2168-8281 |
| ispartof | Natural sciences education, 2014-12, Vol.43 (1), p.57-63 |
| issn | 2168-8281 2168-8273 2168-8281 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_1549956081 |
| source | Wiley Online Library - AutoHoldings Journals |
| subjects | Academic Ability Academic Achievement Advanced Courses Agricultural economics Agricultural Education College Credits College Entrance Examinations College Students Comparative Analysis Conventional Instruction Distance learning Economics Economics Education Electronic Learning Futures Gender Gender Differences Grade Point Average Grades (Scholastic) In Person Learning Intellectual Disciplines Learning Modules Majors (Students) Methods Courses Online Courses Online instruction Options trading Personality Traits Predictor Variables Probability Production functions Productivity SAT (College Admission Test) Scores Secondary Education Statistical Analysis Students Studies Teacher Education Curriculum Variables |
| title | Grade Performance of Face‐to‐Face Versus Online Agricultural Economics Students |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-11T19%3A26%3A17IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Grade%20Performance%20of%20Face%E2%80%90to%E2%80%90Face%20Versus%20Online%20Agricultural%20Economics%20Students&rft.jtitle=Natural%20sciences%20education&rft.au=Greenway,%20Gina%20A.&rft.date=2014-12&rft.volume=43&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=57&rft.epage=63&rft.pages=57-63&rft.issn=2168-8281&rft.eissn=2168-8281&rft_id=info:doi/10.4195/nse2013.05.0013&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3388925391%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1549956081&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_ericid=EJ1026452&rfr_iscdi=true |