Testing the Effect of Hybrid Lecture Delivery on Learning Outcomes
The consensus of studies of undergraduate principles of economics is that the online format is inferior to the traditional lecture format. This study contributes to the literature by employing a research design that appropriately handles sample selection bias and by using a fixed effects model to correct for bias from unobservable variables. The results are that the effect of the online format on learning outcomes is not significantly different from that of the traditional format. JEL Classification: A2, A22 Key words: educational economics, online instruction
|Date of creation:||Nov 2012|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Phone: (860) 486-4889
Fax: (860) 486-4463
Web page: http://www.econ.uconn.edu/
More information through EDIRC
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Daniel R. Marburger, 2001. "Absenteeism and Undergraduate Exam Performance," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(2), pages 99-109, January.
- Byron W. Brown & Carl E. Liedholm, 2002. "Can Web Courses Replace the Classroom in Principles of Microeconomics?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(2), pages 444-448, May.
- Chiara Gratton-Lavoie & Denise Stanley, 2009. "Teaching and Learning Principles of Microeconomics Online: An Empirical Assessment," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(1), pages 3-25, January.
- Daniel R. Marburger, 2006. "Does Mandatory Attendance Improve Student Performance?," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(2), pages 148-155, April.
- Coates, Dennis & Humphreys, Brad R. & Kane, John & Vachris, Michelle A., 2004. ""No significant distance" between face-to-face and online instruction: evidence from principles of economics," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 23(5), pages 533-546, October.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:uct:uconnp:2012-36. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Francis Ahking)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.