ABSTRACT
This study compared Web-based and lecture-based Gerontology and Psychology of Aging courses in terms of student performance, demographic and academic characteristics of students enrolled in the courses, and extent to which these characteristics differentially predicted outcomes of learning in the two course types. Participants for this study were 289 undergraduate students who completed a Psychology of Aging or Gerontology course, taught in either a Web-based or lecture-based format. Evaluation of student performance indicated percentage of points earned in the two course types did not differ significantly. Although students in Web-based courses tended to be older and were more likely to be upperclassmen than students in lecture-based courses, student profiles did not differ in terms of gender, race, grade point average, and Scholastic Assessment Tests (SAT) scores. Additionally, demographic and academic variables did not differentially predict course performance. The results of this study suggest a similar market in terms of demographic and academic characteristics of students for Web-based and lecture-based gerontology courses. Moreover, the findings suggest student learning outcomes in the two course formats are comparable.
Subject(s)
Computer-Assisted Instruction/methods , Education, Distance , Geriatrics/education , Internet , Adolescent , Adult , Educational Measurement , Female , Humans , Male , Pilot Projects , Program Evaluation , Psychology/education , Regression Analysis , Students , United States , Universities , Young AdultABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: This study examined the relative contributions of measures of attention problems and hyperactivity to the prediction of college grade point average (GPA). METHOD: A sample of 316 students enrolled in introductory psychology and sociology classes at a southeastern university completed the BASC-2 Self-Report of Personality College Form. Scores on the attention problems scale and the hyperactivity scale of the BASC-2 were entered into a regression equation as predictors of cumulative GPA. RESULTS: Each of the independent variables made a significant contribution to the prediction of GPA. Attention problem scores alone explained 7% of the variability in GPAs. The addition of hyperactivity scores to the equation produced a 2% increase in explanatory power. CONCLUSION: The implications of these results for assessing symptoms of inattention and hyperactivity in college students are discussed.
