Learning environments and learning styles: Non-traditional student enrollment and success in an internet-based versus a lecture-based computer science course

Learning Environments Research

Volumn 6, Issue 2, 2003, Pages 137-155

  Buerck, John P ^a   Malmstrom, Theodore ^b   Peppers, Elliott ^a  

^a SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Academic achievement; Computer science; Internet based courses; Learning environments; Learning styles

Indexed keywords

EID: 3543018547     PISSN: 13871579     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1023/A:1024939002433     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Ahmad, R., Piccoli, G., & Ives, B. (1998). Effectiveness of virtual learning environments in basic skills business education: A field study in progress. Proceedings of the International Conference on Information Systems, 20, 352-357.
2. Bada, E., & Okan, Z. (2000). Students' language learning preferences. TESL-EJ, 4(3), A-1, 1-15. Retrieved from http://www-writing.berkeley.edu/TESL- EJ/ej15/a1.html
3. Bean, J., & Metzner, M. (1985). A conceptual model of nontraditional undergraduate students attrition. Review of Education Research, 55(4), 485-540.
4. Belanger, F., & Jordan, D. (2000). Evaluation and implementation of distance learning: Technologies, tools and techniques. Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing.
5. Benbunan-Fich, R., & Hiltz, S. (2002). Correlates of effectiveness of learning networks: The effects of course level, course type, and gender on outcomes. Proceeding of the 35th Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences - 2002, 0-7695-1435-9, IEEE.
6. Blum, K. (1999). Gender differences in asynchronous learning in higher education: Learning styles, participation barriers and communication patterns. Journal of Asynchronous Learning, 3(1), 46-66.
7. Brower, K. A., Stemmans, C. L., Ingersoll, C. D., & Langley, D. J. (2001). An investigation of undergraduate athletic training students' learning styles and program admission success. Journal of Athletic Training, 36, 130-135.
8. Champagne, M., V. (1998). Dynamic evaluation of distance education courses. Proceedings of the Annual Conference on Distance Teaching & Learning, USA, 14, 89-96.
9. Childers, C., Rizzo, F., & Bangert, L. (1999). Streaming media for web based training. Proceedings of WebNet 99 - World Conference on the WWW and Internet, Honolulu, Hawaii, USA, 1, 213-218.
10. Council for Higher Education Accreditation. (2002). Accreditation and assuring quality in distance learning. CHEA Monographs Series 2002, Number 1. Retrieved from http://www.chea.org/Research/Accred-Distance-5-9-02.pdf?pubID=246
11. Dutton, J., Dutton, M., & Perry, J. (1999). Do online students perform as well as lecture students? Journal of Engineering Education, 90(1), 131-136.
12. Ely, E. E. (1997). The non-traditional student. Anaheim, CA: American Association of Community Colleges 77th Annual Conference. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 385316)
13. Fraser, B. J. (1998). Science learning environments: Assessment, effects and determinants. In B. J. Fraser & K. G. Tobin (Eds.), International handbook of science education (pp. 527-564). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
14. Fraser, B. J., & Walberg, H. J. (Eds.). (1991). Educational environments: Evaluation, antecedents and consequences. London: Pergamon.
15. Gadt-Johnson, C., & Price, G. (2000). Comparing students with high and low preference for tactile learning. Education, 120, 581-585.
16. Galbraith, M. W., & James, W. B. (1984). Assessment of dominant perceptual learning styles of older adults. Educational Gerontology, 10, 449-458.
17. Garner, I. (2000). Problems and inconsistencies with Kolb's learning styles. Educational Psychology, 20, 341-348.
18. Goh, S. C., & Fraser, B. J. (1995, April). Learning environment and student outcomes in primary mathematics classrooms in Singapore. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 389627)
19. Hardigan, P. C., & Sisco, B. R. (2001). An analysis of learning styles among full time undergraduate college students (Report No. HE-033-941). Washington, DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Higher Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 451811)
20. Hassenplug, C., & Harnish, D. (1998). The nature and importance of interaction in distance education credit class at technical institutes. Community College Journal of Research & Practice, 22, 591-606.
21. Herring, S., (1999). The rhetorical dynamics of gender harassment online. The Information Society, 15, 151-167.
22. Hickson, J., Land, A. J., & Aikman, G. (1994). Learning style patterns of middle school pupils. School Psychology International, 17, 59-70.
23. Jegede, O. J., Fraser, B., & Fisher, D. (1995). The development and validation of a distance and open learning environment scale. Educational Technology Research and Development, 43(1), 90-94.
24. Kerka, S. E. (2001). Financial aid for lifelong learning (Report No. ED0-CE-0013). Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 452365)
25. Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
26. Kolb, D. A. (1985). Learning-style inventory: Self-scoring inventory and interpretation booklet (Rev. ed). Boston: McBer & Company.
27. Lau, L. (2000). Distance learning technologies: Issues, trends and opportunities. Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing.
28. Leach, K., & Walker, S. (2000). Internet-based distance education: Barriers, models, and new research. In G. Davies & C. Owen (Eds.), WebNet 2000 World Conference on the WWW and Internet proceedings (pp. 903-905). Charlottesville, VA: Association for the Advancement of Commuters in Education.
29. Lewin, K. (1936). Principles of topological psychology. New York: Ronald Press Co.
30. Lewandowski, G., & Morehead, A. (1998). Computer science through the eyes of dead monkeys: Learning styles and interaction in CSI. Proceedings of the Twenty-Ninth SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, 29, 312-316.
31. Lockitt, B. (1997). Learning styles: Into the future. London: Further Education Development Agency. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 416374).
32. Luzzo, D. (1999). Identifying the career decision-making needs of nontraditional college students. Journal of Counseling and Development, 77, 135-140.
33. Maor, D. (1999). Teacher and student reflections on interactions in an Internet based unit. In K. Martin, N. Stanley, & N. Davison (Eds.), Teaching in the disciplines/learning in context (Proceedings of the 8th Annual Teaching Learning Forum) (pp. 257-261). Perth, Australia: The University of Western Australia.
34. Markel, M. (1999). Distance education and the myth of the new pedagogy. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 13, 208-222.
35. Martin, W. (1999). Being there is what matters. Academe, 85(5), 32-36.
36. McGreal, R. (1997). The Internet: A learning environment. In T. E. Cyrs (Ed.), Teaching and learning at a distance: What it takes to effectively design, deliver, and evaluate programs (pp. 67-74). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
37. Murray, H. A. (1938). Explorations in personality. New York: Oxford University Press.
38. Phoha, V. (1999). Can a course be taught entirely via email? Communications of the ACM, 42 (9), 29-30.
39. Ross, J. L., Drysdale, M. T., & Schulz, R. A. (2001). Cognitive learning styles and academic performance in two postsecondary computer application courses. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 33, 400-412.
40. Roth, W. M., Tobin, K., & Zimmermann, A. (2002). Co-teaching/ cogenerative dialoguing: Learning environments research as classroom praxis. Learning Environments Research, 5, 1-28.
41. Russell, T. L. (1999). The no significant difference phenomenon. Raleigh, NC: North Carolina State University.
42. Saunders, G., & Weible, R. (1999). Electronic courses: Old wine in new bottles? Internet Research, 9(5), 339-347.
43. Scott, B., & Hannafin, R. (2000). How teachers and parents view classroom learning environments: An exploratory study. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 32, 401-417.
44. Sherron G., & Boettcher V. (1997). Distance learning: The shift to interactivity, cause. Colorado, 6-7.
45. Simon, S. J. (2000). The relationship of learning style and training method to end-user computer satisfaction and computer use: A structural equation model. Information Technology, Learning, and Performance Journal, 18(1), 41-59.
46. Simpson, O. (2000). Supporting students in open and distance learning. London: Kogan Page Limited.
47. Stern, G. G. (1970). People in context: Measuring person-environment congruence in education and industry. New York: Wiley.
48. Tobin, K., & Fraser, B. J. (1998). Qualitative and quantitative landscapes of classroom learning environments. In B. J. Fraser & K. G. Tobin (Eds.), International handbook of science education (pp. 623-640). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
49. Walberg, H. J., & Anderson, G. J. (1968). Classroom climate and individual learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 59, 414-419.
50. Wang, X. C., Hinn, D. M., & Kanfer, A. G. (2001). Potential of computer-supported collaborative learning for learners with different learning styles. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34(1), 75-85.
51. Weinstein, P. (1997). Education goes the distance. Technology and Learning, 17(8), 24-25.