The Online STEM Classroom—Who Succeeds? An Exploration of the Impact of Ethnicity,Gender,and Non-traditional Student Characteristics in the Community College Context

Abstract

Objective:

This study analyzes how ethnicity, gender, and non-traditional student characteristics relate to differential online versus face-to-face outcomes in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) courses at community colleges.

Method:

This study used a sample of 3,600 students in online and face-to-face courses matched by course, instructor, and semester from a large urban community college in the Northeast. Outcomes were measured using rates of successful course completion (with a “C−” or higher). Multilevel logistic regression and propensity score matching were utilized to control for unobserved heterogeneity between courses and for differences in student characteristics.

Results:

With respect to successful course completion, older students did significantly better online, and women did significantly worse (although no worse than men) online, than would be expected based on their outcomes in comparable face-to-face courses. There was no significant interaction between the online medium and ethnicity, suggesting that though Black and Hispanic students may do worse on average in STEM courses than their White and Asian peers both online and face-to-face, this gap was not increased by the online environment.

Contributions:

These findings suggest that both women and younger students in STEM courses may need extra support in the online environment. Future research is needed (a) to explore whether factors such as stereotype threat or child care responsibilities affect the outcomes of women in online STEM courses, and (b) to determine which characteristics (e.g., motivation, self-directed learning skills) of older students may make them particularly well suited to the online environment.

Keywords

online learning course retention non-traditional students ethnicity gender STEM

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Adelman

(2006). The toolbox revisited: Paths to degree completion from high school through college. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

Allen

I. E.

Seaman

(2013). Changing course: Ten years of tracking online education in the United States (Sloan Consortium). Babson Park, MA: Babson Survey Research Group.

Allen

Robbins

Casillas

(2008). Third-year college retention and transfer: Effects of academic performance, motivation, and social connectedness. Research in Higher Education, 49, 647-664. doi:10.1007/s11162-008-9098-3

American Association of Community Colleges. (2011). Fast facts 2011. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED523963.pdf

Aragon

S. R.

Johnson

E. S.

(2008). Factors influencing completion and noncompletion of community college online courses. TheAmerican Journal of Distance Education, 22, 146-158. doi:10.1080/08923640802239962

Ashby

Sadera

W. A.

McNary

S. W.

(2011). Comparing student success between developmental math courses offered online, blended, and face-to-face. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 10, 128-140. Retrieved from http://www.ncolr.org/jiol/issues/pdf/10.3.2.pdf

Babco

(2004). Skills for the innovation economy: What the 21st century workforce needs and how to provide it. Washington, DC: Commission on Professionals in Science and Technology.

Bean

J. P.

Metzner

B. S.

(1985). A conceptual model of nontraditional undergraduate student attrition. Review of Educational Research, 55, 485-540. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1170245

Bean

J. P.

Metzner

B. S.

(1987). The estimation of a conceptual model of nontraditional undergraduate student attrition. Research in Higher Education, 27, 15-38. doi:10.1007/BF00992303

10.

Ben-Zeev

Fein

Inzlicht

(2005). Stereotype threat and arousal. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 41, 174-181. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2003.11.007

11.

Bernard

R. M.

Abrami

P. C.

(2004). How does distance education compare with classroom instruction? A meta-analysis of the empirical literature. Review of Educational Research, 74, 379-439. doi:10.3102/00346543074003379

12.

Bernard

R. M.

Brauer

Abrami

P. C.

Surkes

(2004). The development of a questionnaire for predicting online learning achievement. Distance Education, 25, 31-47. doi:10.1080/0158791042000212440

13.

Boston

W. E.

Ice

(2011). Assessing retention in online learning: An administrative perspective. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 14(2). Retrieved from http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/summer142/boston_ice142.html

14.

Bowen

W. G.

Chingos

Lack

Nygren

(2012). Interactive learning at public universities: Evidence from randomized trials. Retrieved from http://sr.ithaka.org/sites/default/files/reports/sr-ithaka-interactive-learning-online-at-public-universities.pdf

15.

Bowen

W. G.

Lack

K. A.

(2012). Current status of research on online learning in postsecondary education. Ithaka S+R. Retrieved from http://continuingstudies.wisc.edu/innovation/ithaka-sr-online-learning.pdf

16.

Caldwell

E.R.

(2006). A comparative study of three instructional modalities in a computer programming course: Traditional instruction, web-based instruction, and online instruction. (Doctoral Dissertation) University of North Carolina, Greensboro, Ph.D. (AAI3227694).

17.

Choy

S. P.

(2001). Students whose parents did not go to college: Postsecondary access, persistence and attainment. National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2001/2001126.pdf

18.

Choy

S. P.

(2002). Nontraditional undergraduates (NCES 2002–012). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, NationalCenter for Education Statistics. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2002/2002012.pdf

19.

Colorado

J. T.

Eberle

(2010). Student demographics and success in online learning environments. EmporiaState Research Studies, 46, 4-10.

20.

Community College Research Center. (2013). Research overview/April 2013: What we know about online course outcomes. Retrieved from http://ccrc.tc.columbia.edu/publications/what-we-know-online-course-outcomes.html

21.

Dehejia

R. H.

Wahba

(1999). Causal effects in nonexperimental studies: Reevaluating the evaluation of training programs. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 94, 1053-1062. doi:10.2307/2669919

22.

Diaz

D. P.

(2002). Online drop rate revisited. The Technology Source. Retrieved from http://www.technologysource.org/article/online_drop_rates_revisited/

23.

Enriquez

(2010, June). Assessing the effectiveness of dual delivery mode in an online introductory circuits analysis course. Proceedings: 2010 American Society of Engineering Education Conference and Exposition, Louisville, KY, June 20-23, 2010.

24.

Figlio

D. N.

Rush

Yin

(2010). Is it live or is it Internet? Experimental estimates of the effects of online instruction on student learning (NBER Working Paper No. 16089). National Bureau of Economic Research. Retrieved from http://www.nber.org/papers/w16089

25.

Hachey

A. C.

Wladis

C. W.

Conway

K. M.

(2012). Is the second time the charm? Investigating trends in online re-enrollment, retention and success. Journal of Educators Online, 9(1). Retrieved from http://www.thejeo.com/Archives/Volume9Number1/V9N1.htm#VOLUME_9,_NUMBER_1,_JANUARY_2012

26.

Hachey

A. C.

Wladis

C. W.

Conway

K. M.

(2013). Balancing retention and access in online courses: Restricting enrollment . . . Is it worth the cost? Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 15(1), 9-36. doi:10.2190/CS.15.1.b

27.

Hachey

A. C.

Wladis

C. W.

Conway

K. M.

(2014). Do prior online course outcomes provide more information than GPA alone in predicting subsequent online course grades and retention? An observational study at an urban community college. Computers & Education, 72, 59-67. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2013.10.012

28.

Hall

(2011). A predictive validity study of the revised McVay readiness for online learning questionnaire. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 14(3). Retrieved from http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/fall143/hall143.html

29.

Halsne

A. M.

Gatta

L. A.

(2002). Online versus traditionally-delivered instruction: A descriptive study of learner characteristics in a community college setting. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 5(1). Retrieved from http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/spring51/halsne51.html

30.

Hill

J. L.

Reiter

J. P.

Zanutto

E. L.

(2004). A comparison of experimental and observational data analyses. In Gelman

Meng

X.-L.

(Eds.), Applied Bayesian modeling and causal inference from an incomplete-data perspective (pp. 44-56). Chichester, UK: Wiley.

31.

Hukle

(2009). An evaluation of readiness factors for online education (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Mississippi State University, Starkville.

32.

Hung

Chou

Chen

Own

(2010). Learner readiness for online learning: Scale development and student perceptions. Computers & Education, 55, 1080-1090. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.05.004

33.

Inzlicht

Ben-Zeev

(2000). A threatening intellectual environment: Why females are susceptible to experiencing problem-solving deficits in the presence of males. Psychological Science, 11, 365-371. doi:10.1111/1467-9280.00272

34.

Jaggars

S. S.

(2011). Online learning: Does it help low-income and underprepared students? (CCRC Brief No. 52). Community College Research Center, Columbia University. Retrieved from http://ccrc.tc.columbia.edu/publications/online-learning-low-income-underprepared.html

35.

Jaggars

S. S.

(2010). Online learning in the Virginia community college system. Community College Research Center, Columbia University. Retrieved from http://ccrc.tc.columbia.edu/publications/online-learning-virginia.html

36.

Jones

D. J.

Watson

B. C.

(1990). “High risk” students and higher education: Future trends (ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Reports ED325033). Washington, DC: The GeorgeWashingtonUniversity. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED325033.pdf

37.

Jones

E. H.

(2010). Exploring common characteristics among community college students: Comparing online and traditional student success. Boone, NC: Appalachian StateUniversity.

38.

Kember

(1989). A longitudinal-process model of drop-out from distance education. Journal of Higher Education, 60, 278-301. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1982251

39.

Kember

(1995). Open learning courses for adults: A model of student progress. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology.

40.

Kerr

M. S.

Rynearson

Kerr

M. C.

(2006). Student characteristics for online learning success. Internet and Higher Education, 9(2), 91-105. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2006.03.002

41.

Layne

Boston

W. E.

Ice

(2013). A longitudinal study of online learners: Shoppers, swirlers, stoppers, and succeeders as a function of demographic characteristics. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 16(2). Retrieved from http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/summer162/layne_boston_ice162.html.

42.

Lufkin

(2008, March). The STEM equity pipeline. Paper presented at the North Carolina College Career Tech Prep Conference, Greensboro, NC.

43.

Maxwell

(1988). Supplemental instruction, learning communities, and students studying together. Community College Review, 26, 1-18. doi:10.1177/009155219802600201

44.

Mead

M. S.

(2011). The effect of self-directed learning readiness and online course quality ratings on student satisfaction and academic performance in undergraduate elearning (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Missouri–Kansas City.

45.

Mentzer

Cryan

Teclehaimanot

(2007). Two peas in a pod? A comparison of face-to-face and web based classrooms. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 15, 233-246. Retrieved from http://www.editlib.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=Reader.ViewAbstract&;paper_id=19863

46.

Mooney

G. M.

Foley

D. J.

(2011). Community colleges: Playing an important role in the education of science, engineering and health graduates (Info Brief, NSF 11-317). National Science Foundation, Arlington, VA.

47.

Morris

L. V.

Finnegan

C. L.

(2008-2009). Best practices in predicting and encouraging student persistence and achievement online. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 10, 55-64. doi:10.2190/CS.10.1.e

48.

Morris

L. V.

Finnegan

C. L.

(2005). Predicting retention in online general education courses. The American Journal of Distance Education, 19, 23-36. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15389286ajde1901_3

49.

Morrison

G. R.

Anglin

G. J.

(2006). An instructional design approach for effective shovelware: Modifying materials for distance education. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 7(1), 63-74.

50.

National Science Foundation. (2004a). Broadening participation in America’s science and engineering workforce: The 1994-2003 decennial and 2004 biennial reports to congress. Arlington, VA: Author.

51.

National Science Foundation. (2004b). Science and engineering indicators 2004 (Vol. 1). Author. Retrieved from http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind04/

52.

Nora

Cabrera

A. F.

(1996). The role of perceptions in prejudice and discrimination and the adjustment of minority students to college. Journal of Higher Education, 67, 119-148.

53.

Park

(2007). Factors related to learner drop-out in online learning. In Nafuko

F. C.

(Ed.), Proceedings of the 2007 Academy of Human Resource Development Annual Conference (pp. 25-1-25-8). Indianapolis, IN: Academy of Human Resource Development.

54.

Parsad

Lewis

Tice

(2008). Distance education at degree-granting postsecondary institutions: 2006-07. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

55.

Patterson

McFadden

(2009). Attrition in online and campus degree programs. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 12(2). Retrieved from http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/summer122/patterson112.html

56.

Pearson Foundation. (2011). Community College Student Survey: Summary of results. Retrieved from http://www.pearsonfoundation.org/downloads/Community_College_Survey_Summary_201102.pdf

57.

Plumb

LaMere

(2011). Comparing student learning in a required electrical engineering undergraduate course: Traditional, face-to-face vs. online. Paper presented at the 2011 Annual Conference of the International Network for Engineering Education and Research. August 21-26, Belfast, Northern Ireland.

58.

Pontes

Hasit

Pontes

Lewis

Siefring

(2010). Variables related to undergraduate students preference for distance education classes. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 13(2), 8.

59.

Puzziferro

(2008). Online technologies self-efficacy and self-regulated learning as predictors of final grade and satisfaction in college-level online courses. The American Journal of Distance Education, 22, 72-89. doi:10.1080/08923640802039024

60.

Randler

Hulde

(2007). Hands-On versus Teacher-Centred Experiments in Soil Ecology. Research In Science & Technological Education, 25(3), 329-338.

61.

Reuter

(2009). Online versus in the classroom: Student success in a hands-on lab class. The American Journal of Distance Education, 23, 151-162. doi:10.1080/08923640903080620

62.

Rovai

A. P.

(2003). In search of higher persistence rates in distance education online programs. Internet and Higher Education, 6, 1-16. doi:10.1016/S1096-7516(02)00158-6

63.

Scheines

Leinhardt

Smith

Cho

(2005). Replacing lecture with web-based course materials. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 32(1), 1-25. doi:10.2190/F59B-382T-E785-E4J4

64.

Shokar

G. S.

Shokar

N. K.

Romero

C. M.

Bulik

R. J.

(2002). Self-directed learning: Looking at outcomes with medical students. Family Medicine, 33, 197-200.

65.

Steele

C. M.

Aronson

(1995). Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of African Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 797-811. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.69.5.797

66.

Terrell

(2007, Spring). STEM occupations: High-tech jobs for a high-tech economy. Occupational Outlook Quarterly, pp. 26-33. Retrieved from http://www.bls.gov/opub/ooq/2007/spring/art04.pdf

67.

Tinto

(1975). Dropout from higher education: A theoretical synthesis of recent research. Review of Educational Research. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1170024

68.

Tinto

(1986). Theories of student departure revisited. In Smart

(Ed.), Higher education handbook of theory and research (pp. 359-384). New York, NY: Agathon.

69.

Tinto

(1993). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

70.

Tyler-Smith

(2006). Early attrition among online e-learners: A review of factors that contribute to dropout, withdrawal and non-completion rates of adult learners undertaking e-learning programs. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 2, 73-85. Retrieved from http://jolt.merlot.org/vol2no2/tyler-smith.htm

71.

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (1996). Post-secondary descriptive analyst report—Non-traditional undergraduates: Trends in enrollment from 1986 to 1992 and persistence and attainment among beginning post-secondary students. Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs/97578.pdf

72.

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2002-2003). Post-secondary institutions in the United States: Fall 2003 and degrees and other awards conferred: 2002-3 (Findings of the Integrated Post-Secondary Education Data System, IPEDS). Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2005/2005154.pdf

73.

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2002). Findings from the condition of education: Non-traditional undergraduates. Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2002012

74.

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2009a). 2001-02 to 2007-08 integrated postsecondary education data system, fall 2001, and spring 2002 through spring 2008. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

75.

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2009b). Students who study science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) in postsecondary education. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2009/2009161.pdf

76.

U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics. (2012). National postsecondary student aid study (NPSAS). Retrieved fromhttp://nces.ed.gov/surveys/npsas/

77.

Walpole

(2003). Socioeconomic status and college: How SES affects college experiences and outcomes. The Review of Higher Education, 27, 45-73. doi:10.1353/rhe.2003.0044

78.

Wang

A. Y.

Newlin

M. H.

(2002). Predictors of performance in the virtual classroom. The Journal, 29(10), 21-25.

79.

Waschull

S. B.

(2005). Predicting success in online psychology courses: Self-discipline and motivation. Teaching of Psychology, 32, 190-192.

80.

Waschull

S.B.

(2001). The online delivery of psychology courses: Attrition, performance, and evaluation. Teaching of Psychology, 28, 143-47.

81.

Welsh

J. B.

(2007). Identifying factors that predict student success in a community college online distance learning course (Doctoral dissertation). Available from University of North Texas Digital Library. (OCLC: 230804538)

82.

Werhner

(2010). A comparison of the performance of online versus traditional on-campus earth science students on identical exams. Journal of Geoscience Education, 58, 310-312.

83.

Willging

P. A.

Johnson

S. D.

(2004). Factors that influence students’ decision to drop out of online courses. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 13(3), 115-127.

84.

Wladis

C. W.

Hachey

A. C.

Conway

K. M.

(2012). An analysis of the effect of the online environment on STEM student success. In Brown

Larsen

Marrongelle

Oehrtman

(Eds.), Proceedings of the 15th Annual Conference on Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education (Vol. 2., pp. 291-300). The Special Interest Group of the Mathematics Association of America (SIGMAA) for Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education. February 23-25, 2012. Portland, OR.

85.

Wladis

C. W.

Hachey

A. C.

Conway

K. M.

(2013). Are online students in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) courses at greater risk of non-success? American Journal of Educational Studies, 6, 65-84.

86.

Wladis

C. W.

Hachey

A. C.

Conway

K. M.

(2014a). An investigation of course-level factors as predictors of online STEM course outcomes. Computers & Education, 77, 145-150. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2014.04.015

87.

Wladis

C. W.

Hachey

A. C.

Conway

K. M.

(2014b). The representation of minority, female, and non-traditional STEM majors in the online environment at community colleges: A nationally representative study. Community College Review, 43, 89-114. doi:10.1177/0091552114555904

88.

Jaggars

S. S.

(2011a). The effectiveness of distance education across Virginia’s community colleges: Evidence from introductory college-level math and English courses. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 33, 360-377. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/0162373711413814

89.

Jaggars

S. S.

(2011b). Online and hybrid course enrollment and performance in Washington state community and technical colleges (CCRC Working Paper No. 31). Community College Research Center, Columbia University. Retrieved from http://ccrc.tc.columbia.edu/publications/online-hybrid-courses-washington.html?UID=872

90.

Jaggars

S. S.

(2013). Adaptability to online learning: Differences across types of students and academic subject areas (CCRC Working Paper No. 54). Community College Research Center, Columbia University. Retrieved from http://ccrc.tc.columbia.edu/publications/adaptability-to-online-learning.html

91.

Yazedjian

Purswell

K. E.

Sevin

Toews

M. L.

(2007). Adjusting to the first year of college: Students’ perceptions of the importance of parental, peer, and institutional support. Journal of the First-Year Experience & Students in Transition, 19(2), 29-46. Retrieved from http://fyesit.metapress.com/content/l7mq7533wn811777/

92.

Yukselturk

Bulut

(2007). Predictors for student success in an online course. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 10(2), 71-83. doi:10.1.1.96.9618

93.

Zamani-Gallaher

(2007). The confluence of race, gender, and class among community college students: Assessing attitudes toward affirmative action in college admissions. Equity & Excellence in Education, 40, 241-251. doi:10.1080/10665680701434569