Ecar study of ug students 2013 results nationally uom
Sponsored Links
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
1 / 20

ECAR Study of UG Students 2013 Results: Nationally & UoM PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

ECAR Study of UG Students 2013 Results: Nationally & UoM. S. J. Schaeffer, III, EdD Advanced Learning Center Fall 2013. Study Overview. Started by EDUCAUSE in 2004 UoM began participating in 2005 2013 was the 8 th year that UoM participated Method: Data collected in Spring 2013

Download Presentation

ECAR Study of UG Students 2013 Results: Nationally & UoM

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript

ECAR Study of UG Students2013 Results: Nationally & UoM

S. J. Schaeffer, III, EdDAdvanced Learning CenterFall 2013

Study Overview

  • Started by EDUCAUSE in 2004

    • UoM began participating in 2005

    • 2013 was the 8th year that UoM participated

  • Method:

    • Data collected in Spring 2013

    • All UG classes solicited (Only Fresh/Senior in past)

    • Online survey request:

      • Email from CIO

      • TigerLAN prompt page at login

General Resultsand Findings

Summary of Participation

  • 250+ institutions participated in 2013

  • Response rate:

    • US – 29,262

    • UoM – 771 (2.6% of all responses)

      • 120 Freshmen / 143 Sophomores / 190 Juniors /262 Seniors / 56 Other

      • 72% Female / 28% Male (similar to previous years)

Worth Noting: Our students continue to look like other students across the U.S.

  • In most cases the results from UoM students largely mirror those from other institutions in this study. This is a trend we’ve seen since beginning participation in this study.

  • A few notable exceptions are highlighted in this report.

Equipment Ownership

  • Notes:

  • Laptop up from 83% in 2011

  • Desktop is down from 56% 2011

  • Tablet is up from 20% in 2011

  • eReader is up from 10% in 2011

  • iPhone is up from 62% in 2011

Observations and Implications

Observation: Personal ownership of internet-enabled personal technology is very relevant to our students’ academic success.

  • 85% of our students say that their personal laptop is very or extremely important to their academic work and success.

  • In addition, 67% say the same about their smartphone

  • 90% of our students own two (2) or more internet-enabled devices and 60% own three (3) or more.

Implications: Innovative pedagogical strategies (BYOD, flipped, in-class polling, etc.) that rely on personal devices can be readily pursued.

Observation: Campus investments in computer labs are seen by students as primarily for convenience & printing.

How our students use lab equipment:

  • When they leave personal laptop at home (57%)

  • Printing (67%)

  • Specialty software (31%)

  • Faster internet (27%)

Implications: Consider print-only labs or similar spaces? Expand the benefit of bringing personal laptops to campus (charging stations, furniture, space, etc.)?

Observation: Campus support for mobile device as a practical tool is making headway.

Things they can do with a mobile device:

  • Access library resources (40%)

  • Check grades (61%)

  • Register for courses (49%)

  • Check financial aid (51%)

  • Access online course information (40%)

Implications: Explore other ways in which the campus can take advantage of student’s willingness to use personal mobile equipment for conducting business as a student.

Coursework, Faculty, Etc.

Observation : Perception of faculty use of technology is improving

Most or All Faculty…

Implications: Campus faculty community is becoming more prepared for teaching with technology. (A similar survey of faculty self-perceptions might be useful.)

Observation: Students still prefer direct communication with their faculty via traditional means.

Students want faculty to use more:

  • Regular email (65%)

  • Face-to-Face conversation (61%)

    …but not so much on social networking:

  • Texting (34%)

  • Chat (23%)

  • Facebook (13%)

  • Twitter (10%)

Implications: Faculty should not feel bad sticking to traditional means of connecting with their students.

Observation: Campus use and perceived value of LMS (D2L) lags other campuses in US.

  • Pct of our students who did not use the LMS in the last 12 months is 21%, while the US average is 5%. However, 40% wish faculty would use the LMS more often to communicate.

  • The campus LMS is perceived to be very important for your academic success?

    • UoM = 51%, US = 74%

Implications: Need to understand why our faculty use the LMS less than at other campuses. Perhaps need programs/incentives to encourage more use.

Observation: Students would like to have more use of technology in the classroom.

  • More use of personal equipment in the classroom:

    • Laptops (53%), Smartphone (40%), Tablet (38%)

  • In terms of how technology helps them:

    • 54% say is makes them more actively involved

    • 74% say it helps them achieve academic success

    • 73% say technology prepares them for future educational plans.

  • But our faculty seem to be going in the other direction:

    • 70% report smartphones being discouraged or banned entirely in class

    • Only 1 in 5 report encouragement to use their laptop in class

Implications: Disconnect between students and faculty on the role of personal technology in the classroom. What are the impediments? (wireless, furniture, culture, skills)?

Observation: While fully O/L has become mainstream, students do not prefer it.

  • Good news: 50% have taken a fully O/L course in the last 12 months.

  • Bad news: Only 10% prefer fully O/L.

  • Preference: Blended is preferred by 60% of our students.

Implications: Perhaps better understand why students feel this way? Is there a need to improve fully O/L experiences for students?

Should we explore formalizing a broader use of blended courses for the future?

Miscellaneous Observations:

= Yes

  • Classroom lecture capture – 62% want more access to video-recorded classroom lectures that are available via the web.

  • MOOCs are not on students’ radar:

    • Only 2% of our students have taken a MOOC in the last 12 months with only 0.4% reported completing it.

    • 75% don’t even know what a MOOC is.

    • These numbers are essentially identical to U.S.

= ?

Implications: Should we be cautious about our MOOC investments and instead think about more lecture capture technology?


Recap of Findings

  • The UoM continues to mirror national trends (significant variances are rare; e.g., LMS usage).

  • Students see our faculty as having better skills using technology in the classroom.

  • Ownership of personal computing devices (laptops, tablets, smartphones, etc.) is nearing 100%.

  • Student perceptions on the value of technology in classes is strong,…

  • But there is a disconnect with actual use in the classroom.

Follow up:

  • Presenter:


  • All past ECAR study data on UMwiki

  • Login