Implementation of Web-Based Teaching in Political Science
by G. David Garson
August, 1997
North Carolina State University
Contact: G. David Garson NCSU Box 8102 Raleigh, NC 27695-8102 Tel. 919-515-3067 Fax 919-515-7333 E-mail: David_Garson@ncsu.edu Http://hcl.chass.ncsu.edu/garson/ps201/
Implementation of Web-Based Teaching in Political Science
Abstract
A no-lecture, web-based model for instruction of introductory American Government is compared with a traditional lecture-based model and evaluated on several dimensions. The web- based model, developed in conjunction with the Prentice-Hall text by Burns et al., is shown to provide many advantages but is also shown to work most effectively when integrated with traditional lecture and discussion elements. An appendix outlines mediated learning as a much more extensive, integrated model of interactive education constituting an appropriate direction for future evolution of web-based models.
Keywords: political science, American government, education, computer-assisted instruction, web-based instruction, distance learning, educational technology, evaluation, mediated learning.
Implementation of Web-Based Teaching in Political Science
There is increasing interest in the use of the World Wide Web for teaching purposes. A few institutions, such as UCLA, have even begun to develop policies requiring faculty to utilize the web. Interest in web-based instruction is increasing because, as Burgstahler (1997: 63) has noted, "It provides new ways for us to teach and learn. It allows us to do new things, as well as to do traditional things new ways." Others, such as Peter Denning, Associate Dean for Computing at George Mason University, have gone further, arguing that we are witnessing the "demise of the university." (Denning, 1996: 29) as information technology erodes the four traditional cornerstones of the university:
(1) The library as a physical place is soon to be replaced by digital libraries accessible worldwide by almost anyone.
(2) The "community of scholars" around the library is soon to be replaced by communities of specialists linked electronically, divorced from geographical location.
(3) The ideal-typical small undergraduate class has become unaffordable and cannot compete with commercially-provided education on the same subjects, such as computer science, nor can universities compete with commercial courses' glitz and entertainment production values.
(4) Job structure has changed such that universities can no longer hope to prepare students for or promise them a "lifelong career", the central selling point until recently.
In his testimony to the National Science Foundation, Denning then asked, "What roles can universities fulfill that people would find valuable?" He answered his own question by asserting that salvation for universities lies in using the Internet and information technology as delivery tools while looking for new, primarily adult learners as clients.
In political science, all major American Government textbook publishers now have correlated websites and numerous political scientists have begun to put their courses on the web.In nearly all cases to date, however, political scientists' use of the web has been auxiliary to traditional lecture-based teaching. That is, the web has been used as a means of disseminating the syllabus, exercises, handouts, and other course materials, and to encourage student research by linking to information resources such as the Library of Congress, the House of Representatives Internet Law Library, Cornell's Legal Information Institute, and many others. This web-based dissemination of materials in most cases represents additional work for the faculty member, who also performs all traditional tasks, such as preparation and delivery of lectures. For students also, research links and other enrichment materials provided on the web are added intellectual work, welcomed in some cases and not in others, over and above traditional student responsibilities for readings, lectures, and papers.
This paper describes a more extensive experiment in web-based political science education for the introductory course in American Government. The experiment had the following characteristics:
The major traditional course elements in the experiment were the use of a print textbook (Burns,
Peltason, Cronin, and Magleby, Government by the People, Brief Edition, 1997), traditional
(offline) midterm and final with structured and essay items, and a writing requirement.
The Structure of the Web-Based Instructional Experiment
Methodology
Two sections of PS 201, Introduction to American Government, were offered at North Carolina State University (NCSU) in second summer session, 1997. One was web-based as described above, one traditional. Objective pre- and post-tests were administered to the two populations for assessment purposes, and the results are reported here, along with anecdotal student comments. The experiment was exploratory only, without such scientific controls as random assignment of subjects, and the two sections were taught by different instructors. The web-based section had 20 students and the traditional section had 28 -- customary sizes for the NCSU summer sessions.
The objective pre- and post-tests were based on a generic survey instrument developed by Ken Janda, Jeff Berry, and Jerry Goldman for use in introductory American Government classes. The survey poses questions addressing interest and knowledge about politics, political beliefs, experience with computers, and respondent background. The survey instrument is available on the web at http://cout.it-services.nwu.edu/survey/finder.pl?dataset=1/, but was administered in the present experiment in traditional paper format without grade, under conditions of anonymity.(1)
Both survey groups were summer school sections, which normally meet every day for six
weeks to cover the material presented in 15 weeks of a regular fall or spring semester. The
traditional section met in this fashion while attendance was not required in the web-based
section, although the instructor was available in a lab classroom to assist students three days a
week for the six-week term. The two sections differed in several ways. Students in the traditional
section had a higher GPA (2.53 compared to 2.29), were much less likely to have taken the course because it was a
requirement (21% to 59%), were correspondingly much more likely to have taken the course
because of interest in politics (65% to 29%), included many more seniors (41% to 12%) and had more total hours passed behind them (62.6 compared to 47.2), and
more men (68% to 48%). Students in the traditional section were just as likely to have a
computer in their room students in the web-based section and, at the start of the term, were more
likely to access the Internet at least twice a week (78% to 53%).
Web-Based Class Structure
The web-based section required students to have or gain familiarity with the use of a web browser, e-mail, and word processing software. The only formal instruction in these computer skills occurred during an orientation session on the first day of class, attendance at which was required. At NCSU all students receive e-mail accounts on registration, and web browser, e-mail, and word processing software is widely available in campus labs and dorms. Therefore most students were computer literate prior to taking the Introduction to American Government section and only minor problems handled through individual counseling were required to bring students up to speed on the mechanics of the web-based offering.
Grading criteria in the web-based section required passing a midterm and final, writing five short papers, participating in the class electronic discussion list, and making a contribution to improvement of the course or its website. These were weighted 30:30:30:5:5 respectively. The midterm and final were based 80% on response to structured items drawn from a database of 675 items available online and known to students, and 20% on understanding of course readings, 15 of which were assigned in addition to the textbook (Burns, Peltason, Cronin, and Magleby, Government by the People, Brief Edition, 1997). Conversations with colleagues indicated that these requirements collectively were stiffer than is typical for introductory sections at NCSU.
Figure 1 below shows the Introduction to American Government student interface (homepage) on the web. A menu frame on the left allowed access at all times to any of the fifteen "weekly" topics covered in a term, including the six-week summer session, as well as to the class syllabus, the class electronic discussion list (listserv), and the class homepage.
In addition, the button bar of the homepage gave students access to related websites, to the textbook site (a second independent but highly correlated website written by the author and maintained by Prentice-Hall, publishers of the class textbook), the NCSU Social Science Lab, and to instructor contact information. This site is available for use without charge by other political scientists and by the public, at the URL address http://hcl.chass.ncsu.edu/garson/ps201/.
Figure 2 illustrates the top of a typical weekly topic or text chapter page. Also illustrated is the "Something to Think About" feature provided for each chapter. This feature provided an interesting or humorous anecdote or illustration of each chapter's central topic, functioning as an electronic analog of "ice-breakers" often used in lecture-based pedagogy.
Students were not responsible on tests for these short features.
Figure 3 displays the online readings feature of the class website, illustrated for the chapter on Congress. While numerous good readings exist online for introductory instruction in political science, two problems deserve mention. First, reasons such as servers being down, websites closing, and the like, it is necessary to provide alternative readings to the main assigned
reading. Second, because "think tanks" are currently much better about posting analyses than are political science journals, departments, and faculty, there is a bias in the readings toward think tank and journalistic sources. This points up the importance of such initiatives as the Political Science Papers Archive initiated by Prof. Bill Ball of Trenton State University.
Figure 4 reveals another feature of each chapter, titled "Politics in Action," here illustrated for the Congress chapter. This feature provides online exploratory activities for students. Since this feature was not graded, the design intent was to provide activities of inherent interest to students. Occasionally, as illustrated here, political science input was direct, as in the opportunity to listen to audio clips of Ted Lowi's analyses or to listen to C-Span live on the
computer. Other "Politics in Action" features included online computer simulations, tours of historical sites, audio clips of political satire, the Doonesbury political survey, civil rights video clips, and similar activities such as the Cato Institute video seminar on privatizing Social Security (for the bureaucracy chapter; see Figure 5).
Figures 5 and 6 illustrate the "Internet Research" feature. Figure 5 shows the link to this feature from a chapter page, and Figure 6 shows the one of the three possible "Internet Research" assignments for the bureaucracy chapter -- in this case one about Max Weber's ideal-type of bureaucracy. The five required student papers may be drawn from the 45 Internet Research topics, from the 45 "Political Analysis" topics to be discussed below, and from the scores of current events topics in the "Newsbreak" feature, also discussed below. The Internet Research topics are basically short essay questions with Internet-based links as research leads. Below the Internet Research topics, as shown in Figure 7, are extensive related links for research on the chapter topic.
Figure 8 shows the link to the "Newsbreak" page, which is illustrated in Figure 9. The Newsbreak items are one-paragraphy synopses of current events, combined with a discussion questions which may be used in class, in electronic discussion groups, and as student paper topics. The Newsbreak items are drawn from reporting by the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, CNN News, and other online journalistic sources. New items are added weekly by the author and are correlated with chapters in the textbook.
Figure 8 also shows the link from the NCSU American Government site to the Prentice-Hall textbook site, also written and furnished with images by the author. The menu bar on the left of Figure 10, which shows the textbook homepage for the chapter on political parties and interest groups. As the menu bar shows, the textbook site includes a link to the same Newsbreak feature discussed above, but also several additional features: review questions, political analysis topics, online chat with students across the nation (not employed by the present experiment, which instead used a local electronic discussion list), Net Search assisted Internet searching, special topics ("We the People" and "A Closer Look"), and online help. Also on the textbook homepage is the "Overview" feature providing a summary of the chapter and the "Objectives" feature (not shown), providing a list of specific learning objectives.
Figure 11 shows one of the three sets of interactive review questions. "Review I" provides multiple choice items, "Review II" provides true/false items, and "Key Terms" provides fill-in-the-blank items. The "Hint" button for any given item reveals the page number(s) or figure number in the textbook on which the answer may be found. After answering the items the student is given immediate online feedback, shown in Figure 12. These items were used in the present experiment
Figure 13 shows the "Political Analysis" feature. This is a set of three essay questions per chapter, most with Internet-based research links. Slthough not shown in the figure, this feature provides for optional online student entry of responses and online e-mailing of the responses to any instructor who has an e-mail address.
Figure 14 shows the "Net Search" feature. This feature allows students to use pre-selected terms related to the chapter, or to enter their own terms, to conduct web searches using any or all of three common search engines: Altavista, Lycos, and Yahoo.
Figures 15 and 16 illustrate the special topics features, "We the People" and "A Closer Look." By their nature, these features differ in content. Figure 15 shows a special topic on women's history, with an illustration of WWII's "Rosie the Riveter." Figure 16 shows a special topic containing a graph of Gallup poll versus actual election results. Other special topics cover additional selected focuses, almost all illustrated and many with associated Internet follow-up links.
Evaluation of the Web-Based Instructional Experiment
In this section I evaluate the experiment from the viewpoints of the student, faculty
member, and institutional administration, though, admittedly, these overlap.
Student Evaluation Factors
Ease of research. In addition to the obvious fact that all needed research sources are accessible online by clicking links from the class website, with no need to trek to the library, search stacks, etc., when students find materials online, they can use the Edit, Find, feature of their web browsers to find exactly what they are looking for within a document. Found quotations and other materials can be cut and pasted into writing assignment documents. In fact, everything retrieved can wind up as a permanent, searchable database on the student's own computer disk -- much more functional even than bringing a tape recorder to a traditional class.
However, the salience of this evaluation factor is mitigated by the fact that many
students in introductory courses may attach more importance to taking a section where no
research is required than to ease of research. In the experimental section, one of the three
top negatives was disliking the papers requirement. Even higher-graded students barely
scratched the surface of the research and exploration opportunities of the web-based
system.
Interest. Whether web-based learning is more or less interesting to the student will always be a variable. Outstanding lecturers will probably always outperform web-based methods of instruction in terms of student interest and popularity. However, there are some reasons for expecting greater student interest for web-based modes on the average. This is because web-based methods can incorporate color graphics, audio clips, and even movies as well as text. Multimedia research materials which our professional journals turn away for cost-to-publish reasons, such as data visualization using color graphics, can readily be mounted on one's web site for students to appraise. Multimedia implements multisensory learning, which has routinely been found to be more effective pedagogically than unisensory learning such as reliance on texts alone.
However, these oft-cited advantages are theoretical and may apply only to some
students. Moreover, individual faculty efforts at web-based instruction, even fairly
extensive ones like the present experiment, have the resources to implement multimedia
instruction only in the most rudimentary form. In the experimental section, end-of-semester evaluation showed convenience factors, not interest factors, dominated student
positives regarding web-based teaching, whereas the top two negatives were missing not
having traditional lectures and missing not having face-to-face discussions.
Costs: Although the central cost (tuition) remains the same for traditional and web-based
teaching, there are some marginal cost benefits to students. Since all materials except for
the textbook are available on the web for free, and since web services are provided free
by the university, the web-based alternative saves the student the cost of coursepaks and
other ancillary materials usually sold through the student bookstore. Also, in some cases
students experience reduced transportation costs or may be able to preserve work income
opportunities due to the greater flexibility of web-based learning. However, even in web-based instruction, students still have to purchase the textbook and other cost savings may
be of marginal value to students.
Structure. Structure is often a plus for introductory students, who want clear information on what they are supposed to do, how they are supposed to do it, and how they will be evaluated. In some ways, web-based instruction provides much more structure than the traditional lecture method. The entire course is laid out in advance in great detail. Every unit has an overview and written learning objectives. The online workbook provides a self-regulating form of pacing one's learning, with instant feedback. In fact, having the online workbook tied for third most popular feature of web-based instruction for students in the experimental section, trailing only convenience factors discussed below. Students could also circle up to three negatives on the evaluation, including the online workbook, but not a single student viewed the online workbook as a negative.
The complete availability of the instructor for individual and small-group help during most class sessions might also be considered a structure-related factor. While all but one student rated the instructor as "somewhat" or "very" helpful, this was no more than in the traditional section used for comparison. Although objectively much more help was given in the web-based section, help is also related to attendance, and in turn attendance was much lower in web-based sessions, so the helpfulness factor cuts both ways in the experiment.
Likewise, although objective structure was much greater in the web-based section, web-based instruction also requires a more independent form of learning. Independent learning is not for everyone, and introductory students may be less capable of independent learning than more advanced students. As one evaluation response put it, "There should be more mandatory attendance days in class because some students need structure, and enforced attendance." The most common suggestions for improvement in the web-based section had to do with requiring attendance, requiring papers to be turned in one a week rather than at the student's discretion, and providing some overview lectures to give the "big picture." An illustrative class discussion list read:
"Hey people, make sure that you all go to class at least once a week. That way you will be able to keep up with your work. Do not do as I did and try to do things on your own, get help from friends and collegues if it is avaible." (sic.)
Another read:
"I really believe that there should be attendance at least once a week. That way you have to be there and you know that things will get discussed."
In summary, web-based instruction may have some structure-related advantages but this
may require eroding some of the convenience-related factors discussed below.
Course "Passability": Many students view courses from a utilitarian viewpoint: the progress-toward-degree benefit in relation to effort cost. Some factors favor web-based instruction in terms of this criterion, particularly its greater objective structure and convenience. However, some factors favor traditional instruction. Many "A" and "B" students have done well in a traditional format, know they are successful in it, and prefer to stick with it rather than try an unknown. Less able students seeking only to "slide by" may perceive less effort involved in passive attendance at lectures followed by taking exams. The interactivity of web-based education requires greater student attentiveness, response, and effort. Also, to the extent that the web-based instructor chooses to create additional assignments in lieu of the lectures and discussions (ex., in the experimental course, 15 outside readings and 5 mini-research papers based on Internet research), these assignments will be viewed as additional effort compared to traditional sections. Abolishing such assignments would improve the utility ratio for students but would diminish one of the pedagogical values, namely freeing time for other important learning activities.
Convenience: Ideally, web-based instruction allows students to learn what they want,
when they want, and where they want. In fact, convenience factors may spell the
difference for some students whether they can take a course at all while meeting other job
and educational schedules. The top three positives on the end-of-semester student
evaluation of the experimental section were all convenience factors: (1) Being able to do
a lot of the work away from class; (2) Being able to do the work when it fit my time
schedule; and (3) Having the readings available on the web instead of in the library. The
first two were cited twice as often as the third. The convenience factors of web-based
education were recognized, utilized, and highly rated by students.
Amount learned: An attempt was made to assess amount learned through application of an instrument developed by Janda, Berry, and Goldman. Some items in thi instrument proved to lack variance, however, and were not useful for that reason (ex., everyone in both sections answered correctly the item on whether there is a limit on the number of terms a president may serve). In view of the fact that the traditional comparison section turned out to be significantly higher in terms of the GPA, interest level, and academic experience of the students on enrollment in the two sections, on most items the students in the pre- and post-tests scored higher. The relevant comparison would seem to be the percent improvement rather than the absolute score. On this basis, there was more improvement in the traditional section on 6 items, similar improvement on 3 items, and more improvement in the web-based section on 3 items. On two items student success declined on the post-test, but decline was less in the traditional sections. Cut another way, the percentage of correct students answers in the web-based class caught up with the success rate in the better, more motivated traditional class on 6 items and not on 8 items. These percentages are difficult to interpret since neither section made any effort to cover the material in the items in the Janda, Berry, Goldman test. Where one section covered the material, as when the traditional section covered the item on which country has the lowest tax rate, student success went up dramatically on that item. Students in the web-based course covered 675 items in addition to general knowledge from reading the textbook and being responsible for 15 other readings. None of the 675 items were ones on the Janda, Berry, Goldman instrument, but tests showed students retained knowledge of 83% of these items on the structured portions of the midterm and final. My interpretation of all this is that in terms of amount learned, it is not clear that web-based instruction is significantly better or significantly worse. A lesson I draw is that instructors need to go beyond web-based learning to models, such as mediated learning (see appendix), which combine important traditional elements with new technology and media A pertinent student statement on the web-based class discussion list illustrates:
"This is a fun class. Although it is possible to do well in this class without attendance every class, I think a flexible attendance policy, with five or six scheduled and required lectures may enhance the lesson. Lectures on American politics are not always the most interesting things on earth, but a compact and efficient lecture would greatly increase my understanding of some subjects that multiple choice questions don't detail."
Of course, the web-based section had much more than multiple choice questions, but the
statement above also illustrates the tendency of students to hone in only on segments they
perceived would come up in the tests, whereas in the traditional section, the "captive
audience" of the lecture assured most students would be forced to be exposed to broader
course themes.
Satisfaction: The web-based section was reasonably popular, but not more popular than the traditional section. In the web-based section, all but two students would recommend it to other students; only two students disliked the course; and all but one student found the instructor helpful. These positive results came about in spite of the fact that, in spite of widespread advertising of the web-based section, all but one student signed up for the web-based section unaware of its radically different structure and requirements. An illustrative positive comment on the class discussion list read:
"I would recomend that everyone take PS201 on the computer, as opposed to in the classroom. This form of the class makes it easy for everyone to succede, while at the same time offers the oppurtunity to really learn about interesting aspects of our government. Perhaps the biggest benefit of the class is that it forces students to expand their knowlege of computing, without demanding any type of prerequisit computing skills." (sic.)
It is important to note, however, that 50% of the students in the web-based section
stated on the post-test that they prefer the traditional format. Also, having at least some
lectures and some face-to-face discussions was the most common course improvement
suggestion. It should also be noted that the web-based method holds students more
accountable in ways which the literature on programmed learning has shown to be tied to
student dissatisfaction. While interactive education appeals to some, forcing students into
a proactive role vis-a-vis content is far from universally popular among students. A lesson
I draw is, as before, the importance of instructors going beyond programmed or web-based learning to a more integrated approach to the used of technology, such as mediated
learning (see appendix). Because students want both traditional and new media
components, use of web-based instruction as a supplement rather than replacement for the
lecture method is often found to be satisfying and popular with students (ex., see Bee and
Usip, 1998; Schneider, 1998).
Other Faculty Evaluation Factors
Preparation time. Putting materials on the web takes extra time. Documents may have to be reformatted for proper screen appearance, graphics added, online tests and feedback prepared, and so on. Faculty need to learn one or more web authoring tools. A rule of thumb is that even after the faculty member has truly mastered web authoring tools, it takes a week of development to put up a weekly topic, and two weeks if an online workbook is being constructed. That is, a completely implemented course might easily require full faculty release for one semester to develop. This development time could be cut considerably, however, by use of existing online components from textbook publishers, colleagues' websites, and by reducing multimedia elements. Overall it is probably fair to state that course preparation time is significantly greater for web-based instruction compared to lecture-based teaching, but once developed, maintenance is often on a par insofar as future semesters are concerned (until the textbook changes, requiring re-development).
However, the most important student negatives in evaluation of the web-based
section were students' missing the lectures and face-to-face class discussions. Students
could circle up to three positives regarding the course, but not a single student rated the
online discussion group as a positive. No doubt online discussion could be improved
compared to that in this particular implementation, but the study does suggest there is
great challenge involved in attempting to make electronic discussion substitute for face-to-face discussion. A response likely to be more successful in addressing student
concerns would be introduction of some overview lectures and some face-to-face class
discussions in addition to the online material. This, mixed approach, while making much
sense, would clearly tip the scales toward more work for the faculty member for web-based as compared to traditional instruction, unless instructional tasks are shared with
colleagues as discussed in the conclusion.
Contact with students. By eliminating lectures, class time can be spent almost entirely in
direct one-to-one and small group contact with students as the instructor circulates in the
room, assisting students with problems, making suggestions about papers and projects,
debriefing students on their writing assignments, and carrying on substantive discussions
of the study topics. Also, electronic mail received from students can be broadcast to an e-mail distribution list so all students read it, at the instructor's discretion. In web-based
instruction, the faculty member is apt to have more personal and electronic interaction
with students. However, this applies only to students who choose to attend class help
sessions and/or participate in e-mail and online discussion. For those who do not, contact
with students may be even less than in the traditional lecture format.
Professional currency. Web-based teaching allows course materials to reflect the most
current state of the art in the profession. Whereas printed books and journals commonly
present materials a year or more out of date, web-based teaching allows use of new
information as soon as it becomes available. In the experimental course, this was done
systematically in the "Newsbreak" current events discussion items, updating readings,
and also updating research links for suggested student research paper topics, for instance.
Students can read working papers from a wide variety of peer institutions, obtaining them
as soon as they are posted. If "staying on top of one's discipline" is a paramount
academic virtue, online courses are a boon in conveying this virtue to one's students.
Performance evaluation. Many colleges utilize student evaluations in faculty performance
evaluations for purposes of tenure and promotion. In this light, is web-based teaching apt
to affect evaluations assigned to the faculty member. There are reasons for apprehension.
When a web page is posted, students expect it to be kept current. Students who accept
using a two-year- old textbook tend to think all web documents should always be up-to-the-minute. There is also little tolerance for down-time, or just plain slow speed, which is
an all-too-frequent networking reality, frustration over which can also be displaced onto
the faculty member. Perhaps because the web comes to us via a television screen,
students may in these terms, whereas faculty aren't accustomed to implementing the
production values of your local TV station, and usually cannot due to resource
constraints. Moreover, students often miss traditional lectures and discussions and feel
the instructor should be doing all the traditional work and all the web-based work as well.
Finally, the half of the students who take advantage of the convenience factors of web-based education and attend few or no class sessions, may fail to identify in any positive
way with the instructor, causing an "out of sight, out of mind" performance evaluation
syndrome.
Other Institutional Evaluation Factors
Faculty personnel support. As one writer noted of web site development, "Designing a
web site is a team effort. If someone insists that he can do the entire job alone, pass him
up" (Snyder, 1996: 96). Ideally, a minimum of four team members is needed: the content
specialist (perhaps the faculty member), the graphics designer, the programmer, and the
web designer. It is relevant to note that the typical cost for developing an educational CD-ROM for commercial distribution is two or three hundred thousand dollars. CD-ROM
development is in this ballpark because what is involved is more than a single individual
can reasonably be paid to do -- a team is required. While such support costs were not
incurred in the current experiment due to the qualifications of the principal investigator,
such investments are commonly incurred by institutions embarking on web-based
education. North Carolina State University, for example, hired four new full-time staff in
support of 25 online courses in summer, 1997.
Equity. One of the most common observations arising from the literature on the social
impacts of computing has to do with its gender bias against women and minorities (see
review in Garson, 1995: 154-162). While this is naturally of institutional concern, it
should be noted that this literature focuses on computer science instruction and predates
web-based instruction in disciplines like political science. It is not at all clear that the bias
factors observed with regard to programming skills will also apply to use of web
browsers and word processing packages as used in the present experimental course.
Although this experiment does not provide solid evidence on gender bias, it may be noted
that one of the most significant differences between the web-based American
Government section and the comparison section was the enrollment of substantially more
women in the former, which was widely advertised as being web-based. It does not
appear that there is a gender bias in enrollment in web-based political science courses.
Discussion
Online education requires self-motivated students who have independent learning and writing skills and who have access to good equipment. The University of Wisconsin-Stout, for instance, has developed a model of online education which warns "Online courses can be invigorating, personally motivating, and highly rewarding, but not all learners reap these benefits. Computer-based learners are: comfortable writing, are able to motivate themselves to complete assignments, and have the requisite equipment and connectivity." The present experiment provides additional evidence in support of this viewpoint.
Web-based instruction in American Government is not likely to be the cost-saving panacea some administrators think. In fact, implemented poorly, it has the potential to increase costs while diminishing the quality of learning outcomes. On the other hand, implemented well, it can provide a valid educational alternative which will appeal to a substantial number (but not all) students. If the present experiment suggests a lesson, it is that web-based sections are best seen as part of a mix of offerings rather than as a new mode of instruction displacing traditional forms. Moreover, web-based sections themselves will benefit by avoiding wholesale embrace of technology in favor of a mix of traditional and new components.
A mixed approach might involve a pair of faculty serving as instructors of record for two sections, with one faculty member handling the web-based component and one faculty member handling the lecture/discussion component, albeit with less frequently than in traditional sections. Through pairing the total workload would not rise unacceptably, as would be the case with a one-person mixed approach for a web-based instructor. At the same time, the traditional instructor would benefit from student access to web-based components and from reducing the number of lectures, freeing time for course development. It appears there is high interest in such paired, mixed instruction at the author's institution, and it may be a model which appeals broadly elsewhere as well.
Beyond a mixed web/traditional approach, other recommendations for future implementations of web-based instruction in American Government include (1) requiring attendance for the traditional component, as by making lecture and class discussion components part of the exams; (2) reducing added components in the web-based experiment (ex., papers, readings) so total work is perceived by students to be the same as under the traditional method; (3) informing students prior to registration of the nature of the approach and offering traditional alternative sections; (4) providing students with a print version of the online workbook for review purposes while still encouraging use of the online system for feedback purposes; and (5) improving the multimedia elements of the web-based system (ex., to include virtual tutors at key lesson locations, and to integrate drill/review/feedback components with multimedia/exploration components).
In summary, implementation of web-based approaches to the introductory course in
American Government are apt to be successful to the extent to which, unlike the present
experiment, they integrate traditional and technologically innovative educational elements. This
mixed model characterizes "mediated learning" developed in other disciplines by Academic
Systems, Inc. (see appendix).(2) Such models require a broader vision and a more collaborative
approach to educational restructuring at the introductory level than is likely to be the case, or is
even possible, with models relying on the efforts of a single faculty member, but models like
mediated learning have a proven track record of teaching effectiveness, which simple web-based
instruction does not necessarily carry.(3)
Appendix: Mediated Learning
Mediated learning is an approach to college-level instruction integrating technology with
traditional pedagogy. Designed to be consistent with a variety of teaching methods and
structures, it reflects the commitment a faculty-guided, learner-centered approach to instruction
and learning founded on the research of the last few decades and informed by the practice of
outstanding faculty from across the country. Mediated Learning draws upon the best elements of
traditional instructional methods -- lectures, seminars and tutoring -- and incorporates a new
element, interactive multimedia instructional software and support.
Faculty determine the course structure and expectations in the Mediated Learning model. They determine the syllabus, monitor and manage student progress, providing one-on-one tutoring as requested by students or as deemed necessary based on student performance. They also lead small group discussions for students who are having difficulty with particular concepts. In a Mediated Learning environment, faculty find that they can draw from a variety of instructional techniques, choosing which is appropriate at the time. Faculty involve students in collaborative projects, lecture to present special material, and provide customized tutoring to respond to each learner's unique needs.
Freed of many routine and standardized instructional, assessment and administrative tasks,
faculty focus their valuable time on teaching activities with the highest impact -- providing
timely, individualized feedback, developing specialized curricula and working with students in
small groups and one-on-one. In a Mediated Learning environment, faculty have the time to meet
every student and answer every question. Armed with detailed student achievement reports
faculty can intervene with customized instruction. Mediated Learning provides faculty with a
powerful tool for enhancing the learning success of students. Faculty Partners report that
Mediated Learning allows them to teach the way they would want to, if it were not for the
constraints of time, budgets and tradition.
In a Mediated Learning environment, students learn by drawing upon faculty and by actively
engaging the multimedia lessons and printed materials. In a Mediated Learning environment,
learners shift from being passive receptors of delivered instruction, to active learners, working
individually, in pairs, and in groups, actively engaged and learning, guided by faculty who have
the tools to provide the situationally appropriate assistance each learner needs to succeed.
Students have individual learning styles, motivations and preferences, as well as different rates of
learning, and different levels of prior knowledge and skills. By having more interaction with
instructors, and by actively learning in an interactive multimedia instructional environment,
students in a Mediated Learning environment can receive the individualized support each needs
to succeed.
Mediated Learning is informed by the wisdom of practice -- the wisdom of faculty with years of
experience in the classroom helping students learn entry-level economics. Experience in the
classroom and research on learning are clear; students need to be active learners, they need to
apply concepts to real-world problems, and they need timely, individualized feedback.
Mediated Learning represents a return to the traditional and fundamental principles of good
instruction. This new approach enables instructors to be the kind of instructors they want to be,
and their students want them to be more accessible and more informed about each student's
individual learning needs.
Instructor role: The instructor in a Mediated Learning class provides direction, guidance and
individualized instruction. Student role: The student in a Mediated Learning class is an active
learner, working individually, with a partner, or in a group, drawing upon the most effective
resources as needed. Media and text: Economics material is presented in a stimulating fashion,
utilizing a variety of pedagogical methods, appropriate to each student's needs.
A Mediated Learning course provides students with flexibility, but it also provides more structure, guidance, and support than self-paced independent study courses. Students work within a faculty-created syllabus, meeting or exceeding stated class goals each week. But each student allocates his or her time and effort differently in order to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of their own learning. For example, in a Mediated Learning environment, students spend less time on concepts they already understand or learn quickly, and more time on problem areas. Some faculty allow students who demonstrate mastery of the week's material in a pretest to proceed directly to the next lesson. This flexible, interactive, multimedia software design, coupled with the increased impact of faculty in a Mediated Learning environment, makes Mediated Learning effective and valuable for students of all abilities.
References
Bee, Richard H. and Ebenge E. Usip (1998).
"Economics: A discriminant analysis of students' perceptions of web-based learning," Social Science Computer Review, Vol. 17, No. 1 (Spring): forthcoming.
Burgstahler, Sheryl (1997).
"Teaching on the net: What'sthe difference?" Technological Horizons in Education Journal, Vol. 24 (April): : 61-64.
Denning, Peter J. (1996)
"The university's next challenges," Communications of the ACM, Vol. 39, No. 5 (May): 27-31.
Garson, G. David (1995)
Computer technology and social issues. Harrisburg, PA: The Idea Group.
Schneider, Andreas (1998).
"Sociology: The Internet as an extended classroom." Social Science Computer Review, Vol. 17, No. 1 (Spring): forthcoming.
Snyder, Joel (1996)
"Web lessons learned," Internet World, Vol. 7, No. 6 (June): 96-97.
1. Others wishing to register their class for this survey may do so at http://oyez.nwu.edu/goldman/cod-survey.html. The registration process returns a unique URL for each registered class and a second URL where the results of the survey may be accessed. Data allow comparison of a given class with the set of all respondents.
2. The author is a Visiting Scholar in Political Economy at Academic Systems, Inc., and is involved in development of mediated learning curricula for interactive learning in economics. For more information, see http://www.academic.com/.
3. User surveys conducted by Academic Systems during its several 1997 spring regional colloquia on mediated learning revealed feedback similar to that elicited in the present experiment:
* The importance of faculty mini-lectures to supplement electronic material.
* The importance of face-to-face student collaboration.
* The importance of a highly structured syllabus, with clear due dates for progress milestones.
* The importance of require attendance at the drop-in labs.
* The importance of appropriate expectations by students at the time of course sign-up.
* The finding that 90-minute sessions were optimal.
Although the present web-based experiment represented only a very small fraction of what mediated learning does with interactive technology, nonetheless these same lessons seem to apply in both venues.