Learning effectiveness of a flexible learning study programme in a blended learning design: why are some courses more effective than others?

Müller, Claude; Mildenberger, Thoralf; Steingruber, Daniel

doi:10.1186/s41239-022-00379-x

International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education

Table 7 Correlation analysis effect sizes for FLEX courses

From: Learning effectiveness of a flexible learning study programme in a blended learning design: why are some courses more effective than others?

	Pearson-correlation	Sig (2-tailed)	N
Student course evaluation
Overall student course evaluation	0.328**	0.000	123
Structure: The content structure of the module is logical and comprehensible to me	0.251**	0.005	123
Guidance: It is usually clear to me where I stand and what is expected of me	0.244**	0.007	123
Support: There is good support during the self-study phase	0.344**	0.000	123
Motivation: I find the self-study phase motivating	0.313**	0.000	123
Motivation: I find the classroom sessions motivating	0.307**	0.002	102
Learning Outcomes: I learn a lot in the self-study phase	0.180*	0.047	123
Learning Outcomes: I learn a lot in the classroom sessions	0.312**	0.001	102
Coherence: The learning activities in the self-study phase are well aligned with the classroom sessions	0.349**	0.000	123
Interest/enjoyment: I like the course	0.289**	0.001	123
Attendance	0.261**	0.004	119
Educational design characteristics (numerical)
Learning videos	− 0.111	0.205	132
Assignments	− 0.017	0.845	133
Forum students	− 0.007	0.939	132
Forum instructors	− 0.021	0.810	131
Quizzes	− 0.050	0.570	132
Implementation survey instructors
Incentives total	0.225	0.065	68
Developing teaching quality is of great concern to me	0.115	0.350	68
Compensation (in hours) for developing and delivering FLEX courses is appropriate	− 0.081	0.511	68
My engagement in developing and delivering FLEX classes is rewarded in other ways besides compensation (in hours) at the ZHAW	0.178	0.147	68
Resources	0.155	0.207	68
The information technologies available (Moodle, etc.) and related support were adequate for my needs	0.053	0.666	68
Sufficient time was available to develop the FLEX module	0.131	0.285	68
During the development and implementation of the FLEX module, I was effectively guided and supported as needed	0.197	0.125	62
The introductory/continuing education sessions on FLEX were valuable for the development and implementation of the FLEX learning environment	0.240*	0.049	68
Competencies	0.130	0.292	68
I feel able to realise my didactic ideas with Moodle and other e-learning tools	− 0.044	0.724	68
I feel able to develop good learning resources (e.g., learning videos, etc.) for the online self-study phase	0.335**	0.005	68
I feel able to design and manage the student learning process in FLEX effectively	0.227	0.062	68
I feel able to guide FLEX students well in the self-study phase and provide feedback	0.205	0.094	68
I feel able to anticipate the student learning process in a FLEX learning environment and adjust the didactic-methodical design accordingly	0.290*	0.017	67
Vision	0.197	0.116	65
The implementation of FLEX is compatible with the desired learning culture at the ZHAW	0.345**	0.006	61
There is a consensus among the lecturers regarding FLEX goals and didactic implementation	0.273*	0.033	61
The school’s executive committee supports the introduction of FLEX	0.406**	0.001	67
Action plan	0.349**	0.004	67
The introduction of FLEX is organised and managed well	0.333**	0.006	67
The timeline for the introduction of FLEX was good	0.439**	0.000	67
There were sufficient opportunities for the faculty to discuss and reflect on the experience of developing and implementing FLEX courses	0.327**	0.007	67
Satisfaction	0.289*	0.018	67
I am satisfied with the development and implementation of my FLEX course	0.303*	0.013	67
I am satisfied with the introduction of FLEX at the ZHAW	0.303*	0.013	67

*p < 0.05. **p < 0.01

Back to article page