IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/lim/wpaper/072013.html

An Experiment with Online and Paper Assignments: Grades, Completion Rates and Student Preferences

Author

Listed:
  • Darragh Flannery

    (Department of Economics, University of Limerick)

  • John Considine

    (Department of Economics, University College Cork)

  • Brendan Kennelly

    (School of Business and Economics, National University of Ireland, Galway)

Abstract

With the growth of online assignment tools across many courses in higher education, questions remain as to the impact of such tools on student learning and engagement. In this paper we present an experiment that attempts to measure these effects, as well as a survey aimed at gauging student preferences for traditional or online assignment formats. The results of this experiment comparing online assignments with paper assignments are mixed. Students that complete paper assignments get a higher mark. However, students are more likely to complete an online assignment. These conflicting advantages require the educator to make trade-off when determining the assignment format to use. When in doubt the educator might consider using technology as the results of a student survey presented in this paper revealed that the students preferred the online assignments - a result in line with the literature. While the evidence is not conclusive it would appear that the reason for the preference is the ease with which they can complete the assignments.

Suggested Citation

  • Darragh Flannery & John Considine & Brendan Kennelly, 2013. "An Experiment with Online and Paper Assignments: Grades, Completion Rates and Student Preferences," Working Papers WP072013, University of Limerick, Department of Economics, revised Oct 2013.
    • Handle: RePEc:lim:wpaper:072013
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ul-econ.github.io/RePEc/pdf/ul-econ-wp-2013-07.pdf
    File Function: Revised version, October 2013
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. William Lee & Richard H. Courtney & Steven J. Balassi, 2010. "Do Online Homework Tools Improve Student Results in Principles of Microeconomics Courses?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(2), pages 283-286, May.
    2. Kim Sosin & Betty J. Lecha & Rajshree Agarwal & Robin L. Bartlett & Joseph I. Daniel, 2004. "Efficiency in the Use of Technology in Economic Education: Some Preliminary Results," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(2), pages 253-258, May.
    3. William E. Becker, 1997. "Teaching Economics to Undergraduates," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 35(3), pages 1347-1373, September.
    4. Rey Hernández-Julián & Christina Peters, 2012. "Targeting Teaching: Does the Medium Matter? Online versus Paper Coursework," Southern Economic Journal, Southern Economic Association, vol. 78(4), pages 1333-1345, April.
    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. Phillip Saunders, 2011. "A history of economic education," Chapters, in: Gail M. Hoyt & KimMarie McGoldrick (ed.), International Handbook on Teaching and Learning Economics, chapter 1, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. M. Taylor Rhodes & Jeffrey K. Sarbaum, 2015. "Online Homework Management Systems: Should we Allow Multiple Attempts?," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 60(2), pages 120-131, September.
    3. M. Taylor Rhodes & Jeffrey K. Sarbaum, 2013. "Online Homework Management Systems: Should We Allow Multiple Attempts?," UNCG Economics Working Papers 13-14, University of North Carolina at Greensboro, Department of Economics.
    4. William Lee & Richard H. Courtney & Steven J. Balassi, 2010. "Do Online Homework Tools Improve Student Results in Principles of Microeconomics Courses?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(2), pages 283-286, May.
    5. Brendan Kennelly & John Considine & Darragh Flannery, 2011. "Online Assignments in Economics: A Test of Their Effectiveness," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(2), pages 136-146, June.
    6. Andrew Worthington & Helen Higgs, 2003. "Factors explaining the choice of a finance major: the role of students' characteristics, personality and perceptions of the profession," Accounting Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(1), pages 1-21.
    7. Carlos Cortinhas, 2017. "Does formative feedback help or hinder students? An empirical investigation," Discussion Papers 1701, University of Exeter, Department of Economics.
    8. Adel Ben Youssef & Ludovic Ragni, 2008. "Uses of Information and Communication Technologies in Europe's Higher Education Institutions: From Digital Divides to Digital Trajectories," Post-Print halshs-00937212, HAL.
    9. Saima Yasmeen & Muhammad Tayyab Alam & Muhammad Mushtaq & Maqsud Alam Bukhari, 2015. "Comparative Study of the Availability and Use of Information Technology in the Subject of Education in Public and Private Universities of Islamabad and Rawalpindi," SAGE Open, , vol. 5(4), pages 21582440156, October.
    10. Linda Dynan & Tom Cate, 2009. "The Impact of Writing Assignments on Student Learning: Should Writing Assignments Be Structured or Unstructured?," International Review of Economic Education, Economics Network, University of Bristol, vol. 8(1), pages 64-86.
    11. Brad R. Humphreys & Joshua C. Hall & Hyunwoong Pyun, 2015. "An Inventory of Sports Economics Courses in the US," Working Papers 15-49, Department of Economics, West Virginia University.
    12. David Zetland & Carlo Russo & Navin Yavapolkul, 2010. "Teaching Economic Principles: Algebra, Graph or Both?," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 55(1), pages 123-131, May.
    13. Ninos Malek & John Estill, 2024. "A Random Walk Down San Fernando Street," Journal of Economics Teaching, Journal of Economics Teaching, vol. 9(1), pages 17-30, February.
    14. Allgood, Sam, 2001. "Grade targets and teaching innovations," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 20(5), pages 485-493, October.
    15. Christopher N. Annala & Shuo Chen & Daniel R. Strang, . "The Use of PRS in Introductory Microeconomics: Some Evidence on Performance and Attendance," Journal for Economic Educators, Middle Tennessee State University, Business and Economic Research Center.
    16. Dahlgran, Roger A., 2001. "Technology In The Agricultural Economics Classroom: Are We On The Right Path?," 2001 Annual Meeting, July 8-11, 2001, Logan, Utah 36175, Western Agricultural Economics Association.
    17. 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.
    18. Nelson, Robert G. & Wilson, Norbert L.W., 2008. "Evaluating Teaching Methods: Is It Worth Doing Right?," 2008 Annual Meeting, February 2-6, 2008, Dallas, Texas 6810, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    19. Mause Karsten, 2008. "Ist Bildung eine Ware? Ein Klärungsversuch / Is Education a Market Good? An Attempt to Clarify," ORDO. Jahrbuch für die Ordnung von Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft, De Gruyter, vol. 59(1), pages 363-380, January.
    20. Don J. Webber & Andrew Mearman, 2012. "Students’ perceptions of economics: identifying demand for further study," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(9), pages 1121-1132, March.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:lim:wpaper:072013. 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: Lukas Kuld (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deculie.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.