Health Science Students and Their Learning Environment: A Comparison of Perceptions of On-Site, Remote-Site, and Traditional Classroom Students

Patt R. Elison-Bowers, Chareen Snelson, Mario Casa de Calvo, Heather Thompson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

This study compared the responses of on-site, remote-site, and traditional classroom students on measures of student/teacher interaction, course structure, physical learning environment, and overall course enjoyment/satisfaction. The sample population consisted of students taking undergraduate courses in medical terminology at two western colleges. The survey instrument was derived from Thomerson's questionnaire, which included closed- and open-ended questions assessing perceptions of students toward their courses.

Controlling for grade expectations, results revealed no significant differences among the on-site, remote-site, and traditional classroom students in any of the four cluster domains. However, a nonsignificant (and continuing) trend suggested that students preferred the traditional classroom environment.

When results were controlled for age, significant differences emerged between traditional and nontraditional students on measures of student/teacher interaction, physical learning environment, and overall enjoyment/satisfaction, as nontraditional students exhibited higher scores. Students' responses to open-ended questions indicated they enjoyed the convenience of online instruction, but reported finding frustration with technology itself.

Original languageAmerican English
JournalEducational Technology Faculty Publications and Presentations
StatePublished - 5 Feb 2008

Keywords

  • adult learner
  • distance education
  • interactive video

EGS Disciplines

  • Instructional Media Design

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Health Science Students and Their Learning Environment: A Comparison of Perceptions of On-Site, Remote-Site, and Traditional Classroom Students'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this