IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/jfr/ijhe11/v6y2017i5p131.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Learning Outcomes in a Laboratory Environment vs. Classroom for Statistics Instruction: An Alternative Approach Using Statistical Software

Author

Listed:
  • Ryan Sterling McCulloch

Abstract

The role of any statistics course is to increase the understanding and comprehension of statistical concepts and those goals can be achieved via both theoretical instruction and statistical software training. However, many introductory courses either forego advanced software usage, or leave its use to the student as a peripheral activity. The purpose of this study was to determine if there was instructional value in replacing classroom time with laboratory time dedicated to statistical software usage. The first approach used classroom lecture presentations, while the second replaced one classroom period per week with statistical software laboratories. It was hypothesized that replacing classroom time with software based laboratories would increase the level of statistics knowledge as compared to an otherwise identical class with no lab based component.  Both pre-course and end-of course surveys were used, as well as identical examination questions. Comparisons within a time point, and longitudinal performance over the course were both evaluated. Survey results indicated that students would recommend lab based instruction significantly more than a primarily lecture based instruction (32% more, p=.020). Additionally, the performance improvement over the course of the semester was significantly higher for those students participating in laboratories (19.2% increase, p=.011). These findings indicate that sacrificing classroom time for a laboratory period improves the educational experience in an introductory statistics course and may help with the understanding and retention of difficult topics.Â

Suggested Citation

  • Ryan Sterling McCulloch, 2017. "Learning Outcomes in a Laboratory Environment vs. Classroom for Statistics Instruction: An Alternative Approach Using Statistical Software," International Journal of Higher Education, Sciedu Press, vol. 6(5), pages 131-131, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:jfr:ijhe11:v:6:y:2017:i:5:p:131
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.sciedupress.com/journal/index.php/ijhe/article/download/12295/7603
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.sciedupress.com/journal/index.php/ijhe/article/view/12295
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. George Cobb, 2015. "Mere Renovation is Too Little Too Late: We Need to Rethink our Undergraduate Curriculum from the Ground Up," The American Statistician, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 69(4), pages 266-282, November.
    2. Yanqi Zhang & Liang Zhou & Xiaoyu Liu & Ling Liu & Yazhou Wu & Zengwei Zhao & Dali Yi & Dong Yi, 2015. "The Effectiveness of the Problem-Based Learning Teaching Model for Use in Introductory Chinese Undergraduate Medical Courses: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(3), pages 1-24, March.
    3. Mills, Jamie D. & Johnson, Elisa L., 2004. "An Evaluation of ActivStats for SPSS for Teaching and Learning," The American Statistician, American Statistical Association, vol. 58, pages 254-258, August.
    4. Carl Sherwood & Do Won Kwak, 2017. "New insights into an old problem – enhancing student learning outcomes in an introductory statistics course," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(56), pages 5698-5708, December.
    5. Sam Allgood & William B. Walstad & John J. Siegfried, 2015. "Research on Teaching Economics to Undergraduates," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 53(2), pages 285-325, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Michael R. Hammock & P. Wesley Routon & Jay K. Walker, 2016. "The opinions of economics majors before and after learning economics," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(1), pages 76-83, January.
    2. Rita A. Balaban & Donna B. Gilleskie & Uyen Tran, 2016. "A quantitative evaluation of the flipped classroom in a large lecture principles of economics course," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(4), pages 269-287, October.
    3. Anna Maximova & Steve Muchiri & Mihai Paraschiv, 2023. "A Stroll Down the Dollar Street: Teaching Per-Capita GDP Using Internationally Comparable Photographs," Journal of Economics Teaching, Journal of Economics Teaching, vol. 8(2), pages 87-113, May.
    4. William B. Walstad & Jamie Wagner, 2016. "The disaggregation of value-added test scores to assess learning outcomes in economics courses," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(2), pages 121-131, April.
    5. Yann Algan & Pierre Cahuc & Andrei Shleifer, 2013. "Teaching Practices and Social Capital," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 5(3), pages 189-210, July.
    6. J.R. Clark & Joshua C. Hall & Ashley S. Harrison, 2017. "The Relative Value of AER P&P Economic Education Papers," Working Papers 17-23, Department of Economics, West Virginia University.
    7. Ishuan Li & Robert Simonson, 2016. "Capstone senior research course in economics," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(2), pages 161-167, April.
    8. Graziella Bertocchi & Luca Bonacini & Marina Murat, 2021. "Adams and Eves: The Gender Gap in Economics Majors," EIEF Working Papers Series 2115, Einaudi Institute for Economics and Finance (EIEF), revised Dec 2021.
    9. Tim Kaiser & Luis Oberrauch & Günther Seeber, 2020. "Measuring economic competence of secondary school students in Germany," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(3-4), pages 227-242, August.
    10. Brandts, Jordi & Busom, Isabel & Lopez-Mayan, Cristina & Panadés, Judith, 2022. "Dispelling misconceptions about economics," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    11. Urban, Janina & Rommel, Florian, 2020. "German economics: Its current form and content," Working Paper Series 56, Cusanus Hochschule für Gesellschaftsgestaltung, Institut für Ökonomie.
    12. Bruce Morley, 2016. "Teaching empirical finance courses: A project on portfolio management," Cogent Economics & Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(1), pages 1167157-116, December.
    13. Curtis R. Price & Perry Burnett & Daria Sevastianova, 2022. "The attitudinal gender gap of an economics education," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 42(1), pages 233-243.
    14. Carlos J. Asarta & Austin S. Jennings & Paul W. Grimes, 2017. "Economic Education Retrospective," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 62(1), pages 102-117, March.
    15. Graziella Bertocchi & Luca Bonacini & Marina Murat, 2023. "Adams and Eves: High school math and the gender gap in Economics majors," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 61(4), pages 798-817, October.
    16. Isabel Busom & Cristina Lopez-Mayan, 2015. "Student Preconceptions and Learning Economic Reasoning," Working Papers 862, Barcelona School of Economics.
    17. Grace Eau & Derek Hoodin & Tareena Musaddiq, 2022. "Testing the effects of adaptive learning courseware on student performance: An experimental approach," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 88(3), pages 1086-1118, January.
    18. John Chung-En Liu & Yoram Bauman & Yating Chuang, 2019. "Climate Change and Economics 101: Teaching the Greatest Market Failure," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-12, March.
    19. Pratobevera, Giuseppe, 2022. "Homework and finance students’ learning and achievement," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 46(PB).
    20. Rogmans, Tim, 2022. "The Impact of an Online Macroeconomics Simulation Game on Student Engagement and Performance," MPRA Paper 115283, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:jfr:ijhe11:v:6:y:2017:i:5:p:131. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sciedu Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.