2020 | 4 (86) | 62-71
Article title

Shifting to blended online learning and its impact on student performance: A case study for students enrolled in economic courses prior to COVID-19 emergency remote instruction

Title variants
Languages of publication
This study explores whether student academic performance differs between the face-to-face and online hybrid sections in an undergraduate introductory macroeconomic course offered at a US community college. The data was collected from 414 students enrolled in various sections of the course during five semesters from spring 2016 to fall 2018. The findings show no statistical difference in student performance between face-to-face and online hybrid courses and contribute to the literature specific to the discipline of economics, which unlike other disciplines, has shown discord in findings. The usefulness of such results may extend to US higher education institutions to help them make data-informed decisions about their future investments in online teaching modalities and course design in the discipline of economics.
Physical description
  • City University of New York (CUNY) Kingsborough Community College
  • Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2006). Making the grade: Online education in the United States. The Sloan Consortium.
  • Allen, I. E., Seaman, J., & Garrett, R. (2007). Blending in: The extent and promise of blended education in the United States. The Sloan Consortium.
  • Arias, J. J., Swinton, J., & Anderson, K. (2018). Online vs. face-to-face: A comparison of student outcomes with random assignment. The e-Journal of Business Education & Scholarship of Teaching, 12(2), 1-23.
  • Bennett, D., Padgham, G. L., McCarty, C. S., & Carter, M. S. (2007). Teaching principles of economics: Internet vs. traditional classroom instruction. Journal of Economics and Economic Education Research, 8(1), 21-32.
  • Bernard, R. M., Abrami, P. C., Lou, Y., Borokhovski, E., Wade, A., Wozney, L., Wallet, P. A., Fiset, M., & Huang, B. (2004). How does distance education compare with classroom instruction? A meta-analysis of the empirical literature. Review of Educational Research, 74(3), 379-439.
  • Brace, N., Kemp, R., & Snelgar, R. (2006). SPSS for psychologists: A guide to data analysis using SPSS for Windows (3rd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Brown, B. W., & Liedholm, C. E. (2002). Can web courses replace the classroom in Principles of Microeconomics? American Economic Review, 92(2), 444-448.
  • Coates, D., Humphreys, B. R., Kane, J., & Vachris, M. A. (2004). "No significant distance" between face-to-face and online instruction: evidence from principles of economics. Economics of Education Review, 23(5), 533-546.
  • Cosgrove, S., & Olitsky, N. (2015). Knowledge retention, student learning, and blended course work: Evidence from principles of economics courses. Southern Economic Journal, 82(2), 556-579.
  • Crawley, K. L. (2015). Learning in practice: Increasing the number of hybrid course offerings in community colleges. Teaching English in the Two-Year College, 43(2), 141-155.
  • Dendir, S. (2019). Performance differences between face-to-face and online students in economics. Journal of Education for Business, 94(3), 175-184.
  • Dziuban, C., & Moskal, P. (2001). Evaluating distributed learning in metropolitan universities. Metropolitan Universities, 12(1), 41-49.
  • Entangled Solutions. (2020). Institutional change and impact map. (Updated May 28, 2020).
  • Gerlich, R. N., & Sollosy, M. (2011). Comparing outcomes between traditional F2F course and a blended ITV course. Journal of Case Studies in Education, 1(1), 1-9.
  • Gould, T. (2003). Hybrid classes: Maximizing institutional resources and student learning. In Proceedings of the 2003 ASCUE Conference (pp. 54-59).
  • Gratton-Lavoie, C., & Stanley, D. (2009). Teaching and learning Principles of Microeconomics online: An empirical assessment. Journal of Economic Education, 40(1), 3-25.
  • Fortin, A., Viger, Ch., Deslandes, M., Callimaci, A., & Desforges, P. (2019). Accounting students' choice of blended learning format and its impact on performance and satisfaction. Accounting Education, 28(4), 353-383.
  • Hammond, M. (2005). A review of recent papers on online discussion in teaching and learning in higher education. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 9(3).
  • Hodges, C., Moore, S., Lockee, B., Trust, T., & Bond, A. (2020, March 27). The difference between emergency remote teaching and online learning. Educause Review.
  • Jackson, M. J., & Helms, M. M. (2008). Student perceptions of hybrid courses: Measuring and interpreting quality. Journal of Education for Business, 84(1), 7-12.
  • Keller, J. H., Hassell, J. M., Webber, S. A., & Johnson, J. N. (2009). A comparison of academic performance in traditional and hybrid sections of introductory managerial accounting. Journal of Accounting Education, 27(3), 147-154.
  • Leech, N., Barrett, K., & Morgan, G. (2014). IBM SPSS for Intermediate Statistics: Use and interpretation (5th ed.). Routledge Publishers.
  • Levy, D. (2017). Online, blended and technology-enhanced learning: Tools to facilitate community college student success in the digitally-driven workplace. Contemporary Issues in Education Research (Online), 10(4), 255-262.
  • Martyn, M. (2003). The hybrid online model: Good practice. Educause Quarterly, 26(1), 18- 23.
  • Marquis, G. P., & Ghosh, S. (2017). Student preferences for a hybrid course. Journal of Education for Business, 92(3), 105-113.
  • McCarthy, N. (2020, March 24). UNESCO: COVID-19 school closures have impacted nearly 1.4 billion students. Forbes.
  • Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M., & Jones, K. (2010). Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning: A meta-analysis and review of online learning studies. U.S. Department of Education, Office of Planning, Evaluation, and Policy Development.
  • Navarro, P., & Shoemaker, J. (2000). Performance and perceptions of distance learners in cyberspace. American Journal of Distance Education, 14(2), 15-35.
  • Nollenberger, K. (2017). On-Campus versus hybrid courses in a Master of Public Administration program. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 23(1), 625-636.
  • Parker, K., Lenhart, A., & Moore, K. (2011, August 28). The digital revolution and higher education. Pew Research Center.
  • Seaman, J. E., Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2018). Grade increases: Tracking distance education in the United States. Babson Survey Research Group.
  • Sohn, K., & Romal, J. B. (2015). Meta-analysis of student performance in micro and macro economics: Online vs. face-to-face instruction. The Journal of Applied Business and Economics, 17(2), 42-51.
  • Tila, D., & Levy, D. (2020). Revising online assignments and the impact on student performance at a Community College. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 44(3), 163-180.
  • Tseng, H., & Walsh, E. J. (2016). Blended versus traditional course delivery: Comparing students' motivation, learning outcomes, and preferences. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 17(1), 43-52.
  • Utts, J., Sommer, B., Acredolo, C., Maher, M. W., & Matthews, H. R. (2003). A study comparing traditional and hybrid internet-based instruction in introductory statistics classes. Journal of Statistics Education, 11(3), 171-173.
  • Vaughan, N. (2007). Perspectives on blended learning in higher education. International Journal on E-Learning, 6(1), 81-94.
  • Vo, H. M., Zhu, C., & Diep, N. A. (2017). The effect of blended learning on student performance at course-level in higher education: A meta-analysis. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 53, 17-28.
  • Ward, B. (2004). The best of both worlds: A hybrid statistics course. Journal of Statistics Education, 12(3), 74-79.
Document Type
Publication order reference
YADDA identifier
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.