Browsing by Author "Yankosky, Richard E."

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Existence and Importance of Online Interaction
    Farahani, Gohar Omidvar (Virginia Tech, 2003-04-11)
    This research explored the existence and importance of interaction in online courses as perceived by online learners and instructors. The study was based on data from online students and instructors in the fall 2002 semester at Mid-Atlantic Community College(1). Two web-based surveys were used to collect data. Eighty-eight of 267 online students completed the survey, for a response rate of 33%. The study was based on constructivist theory which suggested that students learn by actively participating in the learning process through interaction with the instructor, other students, and course materials. This interaction was measured by different online interaction modalities and a five-step interactivity model developed by Salmon. This model suggested that the intensity of interactivity involves five steps: access and motivation, online socialization, information exchange, knowledge construction, and development. In addition, student characteristics (age and gender) and pedagogical variables (online experience and learning preferences) were included. Findings of the survey revealed that students perceived a moderate to high level of availability in a majority of the interactivity modalities. The highest interaction was reported between students and instructor through email communication and feedback on students? work by instructors. In addition, student ratings of the availability of different interaction modalities in online instruction were correlated with their perceptions of the importance of these modalities. Students reported satisfaction with the level of interactivity in their online courses. In contrast, responses to Salmon?s model revealed a high level of unavailability of the various interactivity criteria. The result of instructor survey, based on 13 responses, revealed that online instructors perceive interaction with students through email communication and providing feedback on their work were important. They did not perceive many of the interactivity criteria introduced by this research to be important. Therefore, they reported these criteria as unavailable in their online courses. This study is important because the extent of systematic research on availability and importance of online interaction is limited. (1)- To preserve the anonymity of respondents, this name is a pseudonym.
  • Thumbnail Image
    The proprietary school sector: a demographic and financial aid profile
    Yankosky, Richard E. (Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, 1989)
    The purpose of this study was to answer several questions concerning distribution of student financial aid in the proprietary school sector. The study was conducted in the Spring of 1989 using a Fall, 1986, nationally representative sample of 3,837 students attending less than two-year and two-year proprietary schools in the 50 states and the District of Columbia. The sample was drawn as part of the National Postsecondary Student Aid Survey (NPSAS) conducted by the National Center for Educational Statistics in the 1986/87 academic year. Data came from edited NPSAS tapes dated May 12, 1988. Several statistical procedures from the Statistical Analysis System (SAS) and Lotus 1-2-3 were used to answer research questions related to (1) types of educational services provided by proprietary schools, (2) types of students receiving financial aid; and, (3) types of aid packages distributed in these schools. Several of the major results are: (1) Proprietary schools provided short-term, high-cost vocational training leading to relatively low-paying entry-level jobs. (2) Over four-fifths (84%) of the students received financial aid. The majority of these students were unmarried (74%), female (67%), less than 23 years of age (52%), lived off-campus (98%) and attended school on a full—time basis (81%). Nearly one-half (48%) of dependent and 70 percent of independent recipients had incomes of less than $20,000. About 30 percent lacked a high school diploma. Almost 43% percent were from minority backgrounds with over 70 percent having incomes under $11,000. (3) Nearly 80 percent of the recipients received either a single source of aid or two sources of aid in their aid packages. About 88 percent of this aid came from the federal government with the Guaranteed Student Loan and Pell Grant programs the predominate sources.