Which online learning resources do undergraduate economics students’ value and does their use improve academic attainment? A comparison and revealed preferences from before and during the Covid pandemic

IF 1.3 4区 经济学 Q3 ECONOMICS International Review of Economics Education Pub Date : 2022-11-01 DOI:10.1016/j.iree.2022.100253
Lory Barile , Caroline Elliott , Michael McCann
{"title":"Which online learning resources do undergraduate economics students’ value and does their use improve academic attainment? A comparison and revealed preferences from before and during the Covid pandemic","authors":"Lory Barile ,&nbsp;Caroline Elliott ,&nbsp;Michael McCann","doi":"10.1016/j.iree.2022.100253","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The rapid shift to online learning during the Covid-19 pandemic led to widespread migration to online / blended delivery across UK Higher Education. This has prompted renewed interest in identifying the features of virtual learning environments (VLEs) which students value and are most helpful in academic development and attainment. Using the experience of delivery on an undergraduate module both before and after the introduction of an online delivery model, we use a revealed preference framework to analyse the influence of cognitive load on the value students attach to VLE features in combination with other learning resources. We also use regression analysis to examine which learning resources are crucial to attainment. Our findings suggests that students avoid cognitive overload by being selective in their use of learning resources. They showed a greater preference for both familiar and passive learning resources like lectures, lecture recordings and seminars in both learning environments. Students exhibited a lower preference for active VLE features - multiple-choice quizzes, open-ended questions and discussion forums. Nonetheless, use of open-ended questions along with lecture recordings and lecture slides had a significantly positive impact on academic attainment in the online learning environment. This supports instrumentalism in the use of these resources. Students were more selective in developing deeper understanding using online open-ended questions. Our results imply that module designers need to accept that such resources will be used more selectively. However, they should still be provided to encourage active, deeper learning.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":45496,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Economics Education","volume":"41 ","pages":"Article 100253"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1477388022000202/pdfft?md5=a776f4403010f0f97e2ff94451610c90&pid=1-s2.0-S1477388022000202-main.pdf","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Review of Economics Education","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1477388022000202","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

The rapid shift to online learning during the Covid-19 pandemic led to widespread migration to online / blended delivery across UK Higher Education. This has prompted renewed interest in identifying the features of virtual learning environments (VLEs) which students value and are most helpful in academic development and attainment. Using the experience of delivery on an undergraduate module both before and after the introduction of an online delivery model, we use a revealed preference framework to analyse the influence of cognitive load on the value students attach to VLE features in combination with other learning resources. We also use regression analysis to examine which learning resources are crucial to attainment. Our findings suggests that students avoid cognitive overload by being selective in their use of learning resources. They showed a greater preference for both familiar and passive learning resources like lectures, lecture recordings and seminars in both learning environments. Students exhibited a lower preference for active VLE features - multiple-choice quizzes, open-ended questions and discussion forums. Nonetheless, use of open-ended questions along with lecture recordings and lecture slides had a significantly positive impact on academic attainment in the online learning environment. This supports instrumentalism in the use of these resources. Students were more selective in developing deeper understanding using online open-ended questions. Our results imply that module designers need to accept that such resources will be used more selectively. However, they should still be provided to encourage active, deeper learning.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
经济学本科学生重视哪些在线学习资源?它们的使用是否提高了学术成就?Covid大流行之前和期间的比较和揭示的偏好
新冠肺炎大流行期间向在线学习的快速转变导致英国高等教育广泛转向在线/混合授课。这促使人们重新对确定学生重视的虚拟学习环境(VLE)的特征产生了兴趣,这些特征对学术发展和成就最有帮助。利用引入在线交付模式前后的本科生模块交付经验,我们使用揭示的偏好框架,结合其他学习资源,分析认知负荷对学生对VLE特征的重视程度的影响。我们还使用回归分析来检验哪些学习资源对成绩至关重要。我们的研究结果表明,学生通过选择性地使用学习资源来避免认知过载。他们更喜欢熟悉和被动的学习资源,如在两种学习环境中的讲座、讲座录音和研讨会。学生们对主动的VLE功能表现出较低的偏好——多项选择题测验、开放式问题和讨论论坛。尽管如此,在在线学习环境中,使用开放式问题以及讲座录音和讲座幻灯片对学业成绩产生了显著的积极影响。这支持了使用这些资源的工具主义。学生在使用在线开放式问题发展更深入的理解方面更有选择性。我们的结果表明,模块设计者需要接受这样的资源将被更有选择性地使用。然而,仍然应该提供它们来鼓励积极、深入的学习。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
4.80%
发文量
26
审稿时长
28 days
期刊最新文献
Equity in hybrid microeconomics classes: Effects on diverse student groups Measuring economic graph competence Improving student outcomes using automated feedback in a first-year economics class Turn the camera on to get better grade: Evidence from a field experiment Environmental economics in the wild: Using long-form journalism and other mass media in the classroom
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1