1887

Traditional Versus Online Biology Courses: Connecting Course Design and Student Learning in an Online Setting

    Authors: Rachel Biel1, Cynthia J. Brame1,*
    VIEW AFFILIATIONS HIDE AFFILIATIONS
    Affiliations: 1: Center for Teaching and Department of Biological Sciences, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN 37203
    AUTHOR AND ARTICLE INFORMATION AUTHOR AND ARTICLE INFORMATION
    • Published 02 December 2016
    • ©2016 Author(s). Published by the American Society for Microbiology.
    • [open-access] This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ and https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/legalcode), which grants the public the nonexclusive right to copy, distribute, or display the published work.

    • *Corresponding author. Mailing address: Center for Teaching and Department of Biological Sciences, Vanderbilt University, Box 351634 Station B, 1114 19th Ave. South, Nashville, TN 37203. Phone: 615-322-3420. E-mail: [email protected].
    Source: J. Microbiol. Biol. Educ. December 2016 vol. 17 no. 3 417-422. doi:10.1128/jmbe.v17i3.1157
MyBook is a cheap paperback edition of the original book and will be sold at uniform, low price.
  • PDF
    237.52 Kb
  • HTML
    43.32 Kb
  • XML

    Abstract:

    Online courses are a large and growing part of the undergraduate education landscape, but many biology instructors are skeptical about the effectiveness of online instruction. We reviewed studies comparing the effectiveness of online and face-to-face (F2F) undergraduate biology courses. Five studies compared student performance in multiple course sections at community colleges, while eight were smaller scale and compared student performance in particular biology courses at a variety of types of institutions. Of the larger-scale studies, two found that students in F2F sections outperformed students in online sections, and three found no significant difference; it should be noted, however, that these studies reported little information about course design. Of the eight smaller scale studies, six found no significant difference in student performance between the F2F and online sections, while two found that the online sections outperformed the F2F sections. In alignment with general findings about online teaching and learning, these results suggest that well-designed online biology courses can be effective at promoting student learning. Three recommendations for effective online instruction in biology are given: the inclusion of an online orientation to acclimate students to the online classroom; student-instructor and student-student interactions facilitated through synchronous and asynchronous communication; and elements that prompt student reflection and self-assessment. We conclude that well-designed online biology courses can be as effective as their traditional counterparts, but that more research is needed to elucidate specific course elements and structures that can maximize online students’ learning of key biology skills and concepts.

Key Concept Ranking

Human Pathogens
0.46209675
0.46209675

References & Citations

1. Allen IE, Seaman J 2010 Class differences: online education in the United States, 2010 Sloan Consortium (Sloan-C) [Online] http://sloanconsortium.org/publications/survey/class_differences Accessed 21 March 2016
2. Allen IE, Seaman J 2016 Online report card: tracking online education in the United States (Rep.) Sloan Consortium (Sloan-C) [Online] http://onlinelearningconsortium.org/read/online-report-card-tracking-online-education-united-states-2015/ Accessed 16 March 2016
3. Barbeau ML, Johnson M, Gibson C, Rogers KA 2013 The development and assessment of an online microscopic anatomy laboratory course Anatom Sci Educ 6 246 256 10.1002/ase.1347 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ase.1347
4. Collins M 2000 Comparing web, correspondence, and lecture versions of a second-year, non-major biology course Brit J Educ Technol 31 21 27 10.1111/1467-8535.00132 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-8535.00132
5. Garman DE 2012 Student success in face-to-face and online sections of biology courses at a community college in east Tennessee EdD dissertation East Tennessee State University Electronic Theses and Dissertations. Paper 1408.
6. Hansen JD, Reich J 2015 Democratizing education? Examining access and usage patterns in massive open online courses Science 350 1245 1248 10.1126/science.aab3782 http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.aab3782
7. Hauser LK 2013 An examination of the predictive relationship between mode of instruction and student success in introductory biology PhD dissertation Old Dominion University. UMI Dissertation Publishing UMI Number: 3576655
8. Hill JD 2013 Student success and perceptions of course satisfaction in face-to-face, hybrid, and online sections of introductory biology classes at three, open enrollment, two-year colleges in southern Missouri EdD dissertation Lindenwood University. UMI Dissertation Publishing UMI Number: 3605532
9. Johnson M 2002 Introductory biology online: assessing outcomes of two student populations J Coll Sci Teach 31 5 312 317
10. King P, Hildreth D 2001 Internet courses: are they worth the effort? J Coll Sci Teach 31 112 115
11. Lunsford E, Bolton K 2006 Coming to terms with the online instructional revolution: a success story revealed through action research Bioscene 32 12 16
12. Maeroff G 2003 A classroom of one McMillan New York, NY
13. Means B, Toyama Y, Murphy R, Bakia M, Jones K 2010 Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning: a meta-analysis and review of online learning studies xvi xviii US Department of Education. Office of Planning, Evaluation, and Policy Development. Policy and Program Studies Service ED-04-CO-0040
14. Palloff RM, Pratt K 2013 Lessons from the virtual classroom: the realities of online teaching 2nd edition Jossey-Bass San Francisco, CA
15. Phipps RA, Merisotis JP 2000 Quality on the line: benchmarks for success in Internet-based distance education The Institute for Higher Education Policy Washington, DC
16. Reuter R 2009 Online versus in the classroom: student success in a hands-on lab class Am J Dist Educ 23 151 162 10.1080/08923640903080620 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08923640903080620
17. Riggins ME 2014 Online versus face-to-face biology: a comparison of student transactional distance, approach to learning, and knowledge outcomes PhD dissertation University of Southern Mississippi Dissertations. Paper 19
18. Rosenzweig AH 2012 Comparing biology grades based on instructional delivery and instructor at a community college: face-to-face course versus online course PhD dissertation University of New Orleans Theses and Dissertations Paper 1550
19. Schoenfeld-Tacher R, McConnell S, Graham M 2001 Do no harm: a comparison of the effects of on-line vs. traditional delivery media on a science course J Sci Educ Technol 10 257 265 10.1023/A:1016690600795 http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1016690600795
20. Siemens G, Gašević D, Dawson S 2015 Preparing for the digital university: a review of the history and current state of distance, blended and online learning 97 120 Retrieved from http://linkresearchlab.org/PreparingDigitalUniversity.pdf
21. Smith JI, Tanner K 2010 The problem of revealing how students think: concept inventories and beyond CBE Life Sci Educ 9 1 1 5 10.1187/cbe.09-12-0094 20194800 2830154 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.09-12-0094
22. Somenarain L, Akkaraju S, Gharbaran R 2010 Student perceptions and learning outcomes in asynchronous and synchronous online learning environments in a biology course MERLOT J Online Teach Learn 6 353 356

Supplemental Material

No supplementary material available for this content.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/jmbe/10.1128/jmbe.v17i3.1157
2016-12-02
2019-09-21

Abstract:

Online courses are a large and growing part of the undergraduate education landscape, but many biology instructors are skeptical about the effectiveness of online instruction. We reviewed studies comparing the effectiveness of online and face-to-face (F2F) undergraduate biology courses. Five studies compared student performance in multiple course sections at community colleges, while eight were smaller scale and compared student performance in particular biology courses at a variety of types of institutions. Of the larger-scale studies, two found that students in F2F sections outperformed students in online sections, and three found no significant difference; it should be noted, however, that these studies reported little information about course design. Of the eight smaller scale studies, six found no significant difference in student performance between the F2F and online sections, while two found that the online sections outperformed the F2F sections. In alignment with general findings about online teaching and learning, these results suggest that well-designed online biology courses can be effective at promoting student learning. Three recommendations for effective online instruction in biology are given: the inclusion of an online orientation to acclimate students to the online classroom; student-instructor and student-student interactions facilitated through synchronous and asynchronous communication; and elements that prompt student reflection and self-assessment. We conclude that well-designed online biology courses can be as effective as their traditional counterparts, but that more research is needed to elucidate specific course elements and structures that can maximize online students’ learning of key biology skills and concepts.

Highlighted Text: Show | Hide
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/jmbe/17/3/jmbe-17-417.xml.a.html?itemId=/content/journal/jmbe/10.1128/jmbe.v17i3.1157&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Please check the format of the address you have entered.
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error