IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/dlw/wpaper/13-14..html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Student Choices of Reduced Seat Time in a Blended Introductory Statistics Course

Author

Listed:
  • CARLOS J. ASARTA

    (Department of Economics,University of Delaware)

  • JAMES R. SCHMIDT

    (College of Business Administration, University of Nebraska)

Abstract

Two instructional features are available to students in blended courses that are not present in traditional courses. First, online content is available with the intent that it substitute for a portion of face-to-face lectures or other in-class types of material delivery. Second, in-class seat time in a blended course is reduced as compared to the traditional version of the course. In this paper, we explore student choices of reduced seat time in a style of blended course that does not have a punitive attendance policy, uses online lectures rather than in-class lectures, and conducts alternative, but optional, in-class activities. After accounting for the natural tendency of students to skip classes in a traditional course, we find an interval estimate of 49 to 62 percent for the mean reduction in seat time chosen by students. Also, using an empirical model of attendance, we find that student use of online materials contributes in a positive way to class attendance.

Suggested Citation

  • Carlos J. Asarta & James R. Schmidt, 2013. "Student Choices of Reduced Seat Time in a Blended Introductory Statistics Course," Working Papers 13-14, University of Delaware, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:dlw:wpaper:13-14.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.lerner.udel.edu/sites/default/files/ECON/PDFs/RePEc/dlw/WorkingPapers/2013/UDWP13-14.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David Romer, 1993. "Do Students Go to Class? Should They?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 7(3), pages 167-174, Summer.
    2. Charles L. Ballard & Marianne F. Johnson, 2004. "Basic Math Skills and Performance in an Introductory Economics Class," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(1), pages 3-23, January.
    3. Carlin Dowling & Jayne Godfrey & Nikole Gyles, 2003. "Do hybrid flexible delivery teaching methods improve accounting students' learning outcomes?," Accounting Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(4), pages 373-391.
    4. Alan Farley & Ameeta Jain & Dianne Thomson, 2011. "Blended Learning in Finance: Comparing Student Perceptions of Lectures, Tutorials and Online Learning Environments Across Different Year Levels," Economic Papers, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 30(1), pages 99-108, March.
    5. Keller, J. Howard & Hassell, John M. & Webber, Sally A. & Johnson, James N., 2009. "A comparison of academic performance in traditional and hybrid sections of introductory managerial accounting," Journal of Accounting Education, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 147-154.
    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. Ann L. Owen, 2011. "Student Characteristics, Behavior, and Performance in Economics Classes," Chapters, in: Gail M. Hoyt & KimMarie McGoldrick (ed.), International Handbook on Teaching and Learning Economics, chapter 32, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. Debbie Delaney & Lisa McManus & Chew Ng, 2015. "First Year Accounting Students’ Perceptions Of Blended Learning," Business Education and Accreditation, The Institute for Business and Finance Research, vol. 7(2), pages 9-23.
    3. Abhijit Sharma, 2015. "Use of Bloomberg Professional in support of finance and economics teaching," Cogent Economics & Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(1), pages 1115618-111, December.
    4. McCarthy, Mary & Kusaila, Michelle & Grasso, Lawrence, 2019. "Intermediate accounting and auditing: Does course delivery mode impact student performance?," Journal of Accounting Education, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 26-42.
    5. Odell, Kathleen E., 2018. "Team-based learning and student performance: Preliminary evidence from a principles of macroeconomics classroom," International Review of Economics Education, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 44-58.
    6. Averil Cook, 2010. "Improving the Success Rate in Statistics," Discussion Papers Series 415, School of Economics, University of Queensland, Australia.
    7. Daniel R. Marburger, 2001. "Absenteeism and Undergraduate Exam Performance," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(2), pages 99-109, January.
    8. Bakker, Bas & Ghazanchyan, Manuk & Ho, Alex & Nanda, Vibha, 2020. "The Lack of Convergence of Latin-America Compared with CESEE: Is Low Investment to Blame?," MPRA Paper 101287, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Paul Kagundu & Glenwood Ross, 2015. "The Impact of Question Order on Multiple Choice Exams on Student Performance in an Unconventional Introductory Economics Course," Journal for Economic Educators, Middle Tennessee State University, Business and Economic Research Center, vol. 15(1), pages 19-36, Fall.
    10. Belokrylov, K. & Kivarina, M. & Myasnikov, A. & Ogurtsova, E., 2019. "The Role of Mathematics in Teaching Undergraduate Economics: Students' Opinions and Recommendations," Journal of the New Economic Association, New Economic Association, vol. 43(3), pages 116-150.
    11. Lisa Barrow & Cecilia Elena Rouse, 2018. "Financial Incentives and Educational Investment: The Impact of Performance-based Scholarships on Student Time Use," Education Finance and Policy, MIT Press, vol. 13(4), pages 419-448, Fall.
    12. Mushay A. Ogundipe & Olufemi A. Falade, 2014. "Student-Teacher Perception of Time Allocation and Academic Achievement in Tai Solarin University of Education," International Journal of Learning and Development, Macrothink Institute, vol. 4(1), pages 65-70, March.
    13. Oriana Bandiera & Valentino Larcinese & Imran Rasul, 2010. "Heterogeneous Class Size Effects: New Evidence from a Panel of University Students," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 120(549), pages 1365-1398, December.
    14. Zimmermann, Klaus F. & Bauer, Thomas K., 1998. "Learning Efficiency of Economics Students," IZA Discussion Papers 23, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    15. Dey, Ishita, 2018. "Class attendance and academic performance: A subgroup analysis," International Review of Economics Education, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 29-40.
    16. Damon Clark & David Gill & Victoria Prowse & Mark Rush, 2020. "Using Goals to Motivate College Students: Theory and Evidence From Field Experiments," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 102(4), pages 648-663, October.
    17. Ameeta Jain & Alan Farley, 2012. "Mobile Phone-Based Audience Response System and Student Engagement in Large-Group Teaching," Economic Papers, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 31(4), pages 428-439, December.
    18. Hans Bonesrønning & Leiv Opstad, 2012. "How Much is Students' College Performance Affected by Quantity of Study?," International Review of Economic Education, Economics Network, University of Bristol, vol. 11(2), pages 46-63.
    19. Göke, Michael, 2008. "Homo oeconomicus im Hörsaal: Die Rationalität studentischer Nebengespräche in Lehrveranstaltungen," Arbeitspapiere der FOM 9, FOM Hochschule für Oekonomie & Management.
    20. Gervas Huxley & Mike Peacey, 2014. "A Simple Model of Learning Styles," The Centre for Market and Public Organisation 14/322, The Centre for Market and Public Organisation, University of Bristol, UK.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Blended Courses; Business Statistics; Student Choice; Undergraduate; Education;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • A10 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics - - - General
    • A23 - General Economics and Teaching - - Economic Education and Teaching of Economics - - - Graduate
    • C00 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - General - - - 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:dlw:wpaper:13-14.. 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: Saul Hoffman (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deudeus.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.