传统课堂的案例

Alan Green
{"title":"传统课堂的案例","authors":"Alan Green","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2120858","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Criticisms of higher education and tight budgets have increased pressure on instructors to consider new pedagogical methods, including classroom experiments and online or hybrid/online courses. This study analyzes the impact of different pedagogical methods in six sections of macroeconomic principles taught during the 2011–2012 academic year. A traditional lecture/discussion control section is compared with experimental sections that used an extensive class simulation and two hybrid online sections that met only once per week during the regular semester. Students in simulation sections scored on average nearly five percent worse on the post-test, although those who participated the most did score higher. Students in the hybrid online sections scored nearly ten percent lower than students in the control section. These results indicate that instructors and administrators should be wary of unproven methods, especially online instruction.","PeriodicalId":383397,"journal":{"name":"Innovation Educator: Courses","volume":"89 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-06-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"14","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Case for the Traditional Classroom\",\"authors\":\"Alan Green\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.2120858\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Criticisms of higher education and tight budgets have increased pressure on instructors to consider new pedagogical methods, including classroom experiments and online or hybrid/online courses. This study analyzes the impact of different pedagogical methods in six sections of macroeconomic principles taught during the 2011–2012 academic year. A traditional lecture/discussion control section is compared with experimental sections that used an extensive class simulation and two hybrid online sections that met only once per week during the regular semester. Students in simulation sections scored on average nearly five percent worse on the post-test, although those who participated the most did score higher. Students in the hybrid online sections scored nearly ten percent lower than students in the control section. These results indicate that instructors and administrators should be wary of unproven methods, especially online instruction.\",\"PeriodicalId\":383397,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Innovation Educator: Courses\",\"volume\":\"89 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2012-06-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"14\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Innovation Educator: Courses\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2120858\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Innovation Educator: Courses","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2120858","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 14

摘要

对高等教育的批评和紧张的预算增加了教师考虑新的教学方法的压力,包括课堂实验和在线或混合/在线课程。本研究分析了2011-2012学年在宏观经济原理的六个部分中不同教学方法的影响。传统的讲座/讨论控制部分与实验部分进行比较,实验部分使用广泛的课堂模拟和两个混合在线部分,这些部分在常规学期中每周只见面一次。参加模拟部分的学生在后测试中平均得分低了近5%,尽管参加最多的学生得分更高。参加混合在线小组的学生得分比参加控制小组的学生低近10%。这些结果表明,教师和管理者应该警惕未经证实的方法,特别是在线教学。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Case for the Traditional Classroom
Criticisms of higher education and tight budgets have increased pressure on instructors to consider new pedagogical methods, including classroom experiments and online or hybrid/online courses. This study analyzes the impact of different pedagogical methods in six sections of macroeconomic principles taught during the 2011–2012 academic year. A traditional lecture/discussion control section is compared with experimental sections that used an extensive class simulation and two hybrid online sections that met only once per week during the regular semester. Students in simulation sections scored on average nearly five percent worse on the post-test, although those who participated the most did score higher. Students in the hybrid online sections scored nearly ten percent lower than students in the control section. These results indicate that instructors and administrators should be wary of unproven methods, especially online instruction.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信