Investigating Learning Effectiveness and Student Satisfaction Across Three Course Delivery Modes

ABSTRACT

As the prevalence of online education grows, we see a burgeoning interest by educators, researchers and policymakers in investigating the impact of delivery modes on various aspects of teaching and learning effectiveness. Our study contributes to this expanding stream of research. We use objective and subjective measures of learning outcomes to compare learning effectiveness and student perceptions across three different delivery modes, traditional (face-to-face), hybrid (a mix of in-person and online asynchronous sessions), and online (asynchronous). For the objective measures, we use scores on Rote, Critical Thinking, and Engagement assessment tools in a required introductory international business course. For the subjective measures, we compare student perceptions by analyzing scores from the Student Evaluation of Instructor (SEIs) surveys administered at the completion of each course. We find differences in the Critical Thinking and Engagement components whereby students in the hybrid delivery group performed better than their traditional and online counterparts. Online students generally had lower scores across the board, especially on the Engagement dimension. In their totality, the objective data results support the value of in-person delivery for learning effectiveness. Regarding student perceptions, results show similar learning experience assessments for the traditional and hybrid modes across most dimensions. We also noted that students were more critical in assessing instructors and learning experiences in online course sections. The contribution of this study is that it champions a more refined approach in conceptualizing instrumental and affective measures of learning effectiveness by leveraging multiple dimensions of both performance and student satisfaction. We completed our research pre-COVID-19, and as such, it was not impacted by the many pedagogical and course delivery challenges faced during the pandemic. © 2022 Neilson Journals Publishing.