Hybrid or blended learning (BL) has been shown to be equivalent to or better than face-to-face (FTF) instruction in a broad variety of contexts. We randomly assigned students to either 50/50 BL or 100% FTF versions of a research methods and statistics in psychology course. Students who took the BL version of the course scored significantly lower on measures of quantitative mastery of statistical concepts than those who took the FTF version; however, the size of this effect was quite small. We detected no significant difference between BL and FTF in the expression of critical thinking through writing or writing mechanics. The greatest difference in performance was among instructors regardless of instruction type. We discuss these results in the context of increasing online and BL instruction, particularly with regard to teaching psychological statistics, research methods, and critical thinking.
AbersonC. L.BergerD. E.HealyM. R.RomeroV. L. (2003). Evaluation of an interactive tutorial for teaching hypothesis testing concepts. Teaching of Psychology, 30, 75–78. doi:10.1207/S15328023TOP3001_12
2.
AkyüzH. I.SamsaS. (2009). Critical thinking skills of preservice teachers in the blended learning environment. International Journal of Human Sciences, 6, 538–550.
3.
Al-JarfR. S. (2004). The effects of web-based learning on struggling EFL college writers. Foreign Language Annals, 37, 49–57.
4.
AllenI. E.SeamanJ. (2014). Grade change: Tracking online education in the United States. Babson Park, MA: Babson Survey Research Group and Quahog Research Group, LLC.
5.
AllenI. E.SeamanJ.GarrettR. (2007). Blending in: The extent and promise of blended education in the United States. Needham, MA: Sloan-C.
ArispeK.BlakeR. J. (2012). Individual factors and successful learning in a hybrid course. System, 40, 449–465. doi:org/10.1016/j.system.2012.10.013
8.
AycockA.GarnhamC.KaletaR. (2002). Lessons learned from the hybrid course project. Teaching with Technology Today, 8, 9–21.
9.
BoyleT.BradleyC.ChalkP.JonesR.PickardP. (2003). Using blended learning to improve student success rates in learning to program. Journal of Educational Media, 28, 165–178. doi:org/10.1080/1358165032000153160
10.
BoyleJ. T.NicolD. J. (2003). Using classroom communication systems to support interaction and discussion in large class settings. Research in Learning Technology, 11, 43–57.
11.
CottleN. R.GloverR. J. (2011). Teaching human development: A case for blended learning. Teaching of Psychology, 38, 205–208. doi:org/10.1177/0098628311411900
12.
DaleyP.ReddiganJ.ClarkeA.ShorlinS. (2013). Evaluation of a hybrid peer-teaching method for undergraduate medical microbiology. Paper presented at the Medical Education Scholarship Forum Proceedings, Corner Brook, Newfoundland, Canada.
13.
DeBordK. A.ArugueteM. S.MuhligJ. (2004). Are computer-assisted teaching methods effective?Teaching of Psychology, 31, 65–68. doi:org/10.1207/s15328023top3101_13
14.
DziubanC.MoskalP.HartmanJ. (2005). Higher education, blended learning, and the generations: Knowledge is power: No more. In BourneJ.MooreJ. C. (Eds.), Elements of quality online education: Engaging communities, pp. 85–100. Needham, MA: Sloan Center for Online Education.
15.
EnglertC. S.ZhaoY.DunsmoreK.CollingsN. Y.WolbersK. (2007). Scaffolding the writing of students with disabilities through procedural facilitation: Using an Internet-based technology to improve performance. Learning Disability Quarterly, 30, 9–29.
16.
GarrisonD. R.KanukaH. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. Internet and Higher Education, 7, 95–105. doi:org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2004.02.001
IBM Corp. (Released 2014). IBM SPSS Statistics for Mac (Version 23.0). Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.
19.
JensenS. A. (2011). In-class versus online video lectures: Similar learning outcomes, but a preference for in-class. Teaching of Psychology, 38, 298–302. doi:org/10.1177/0098628311421336
20.
LevineT. T.HullettC. R. (2002). Eta squared, partial eta squared and misreporting of effect size in communication research. Human Communication Research, 28, 612–625.
21.
MeansB.ToyamaY.MurphyR.BakiaM.JonesK. (2009). Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning: A meta-analysis and review of online learning studies. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
22.
MeltonB. F.BlandH. W.Chopak-FossJ. (2009). Achievement and satisfaction in blended learning versus traditional general health course designs. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 3. doi:10.20429/ijsotl.2009.030126
23.
MooreG. S.PerlowA.JudgeC.KohH. (2006). Using blended learning in training the public health workforce in emergency preparedness. Public Health Reports, 121, 217–221.
24.
NorbergA.DziubanC. D.MoskalP. D. (2011). A time-based blended learning model. On the Horizon, 19, 207–216.
25.
NovellM.BohigasX.JaénX. (2009). Description and evaluation of a hybrid optics course. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 46, 367–380.
26.
OliverM.TrigwellK. (2005). Can ‘Blended Learning’ be redeemed?E-Learning, 2, 17–26.
27.
OsborneR. E.KrieseP.TobeyH.JohnsonE. (2009). And never the two shall meet? Student vs. faculty perceptions of online courses. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 40, 171–182. doi:org/10.2190/EC.40.2.b
28.
PetersonD. J. (2016). The flipped classroom improves student achievement and course satisfaction in a statistics course: A quasi-experimental study. Teaching of Psychology, 43, 10–15. doi:org/10.1177/0098628315620063
RovaiA. P. (2002). Sense of community, perceived cognitive learning, and persistence in asynchronous learning networks. The Internet and Higher Education, 5, 319–332.
31.
SanaF.FenesiB.KimJ. A. (2011). A case study of the introductory psychology blended learning model at McMaster University. The Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 2, 1–10.
32.
SchwartzT. A. (2014). Flipping the statistics classroom in nursing education. The Journal of Nursing Education, 53, 199–206. doi:org/10.3928/01484834-20140325-02
SuterW. N.PerryM. K. (1997). Evaluation by electronic mail. Paper presented at the Mid-South Educational Research Association Annual Meeting, Memphis, TN.
38.
TouchtonM. (2015). Flipping the classroom and student performance in advanced statistics: Evidence from a quasi-experiment. Journal of Political Science Education, 11, 28–44. doi:org/10.1080/15512169.2014.985105
39.
TwiggC. A. (2003). Improving learning and reducing costs: New models for online learning. Educause Review, 38, 28–38.
40.
VigdorJ. L.LaddH. F.MartinezE. (2014). Scaling the digital divide: Home computer technology and student achievement. Economic Inquiry, 52, 1103–1119.
41.
WilsonS. G. (2013). The flipped class: A method to address the challenges of an undergraduate statistics course. Teaching of Psychology, 40, 193–199. doi:org/10.1177/0098628313487461
