X hits on this document

PDF document

DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln - page 87 / 152

363 views

0 shares

0 downloads

0 comments

87 / 152

85

external application focus on the validity of drawing inferences from this data and

attempting to apply said reasoning to other environments or situations. That is, results of

this study are not intended to suggest that if another academic institution were to employ

the same course without modification, similar results could be expected. Consequently,

generalizations should be made while taking into consideration the demographic and

institutional factors.

Selection was considered a possible threat to both internal and external validity.

The experimental design utilized a purposive sampling technique in which participants

were selected based on their class and instructor. According to Patton (2002) criterion

sampling was used since it can be an ―ongoing program monitoring system‖ and it works

with ―quality assurance efforts‖ which is the goal of this study (p. 238). Findings specific

to previous knowledge suggest there was no significant difference, (p = .968) between

pretest scores and non Web 2.0 and Web 2.0 scores. This lack of significant difference

suggests no difference in background knowledge; however a pretest with no connection

to one‘s academic record can result in a lack of time and effort in taking the pretest. The

results of this study must take this potential ―pretest effect‖ factor into account and results

may not be applicable to all students. These factors should be considered when attempts

are made to generalize research findings to the community college general student

population.

Document info
Document views363
Page views363
Page last viewedThu Dec 08 00:20:57 UTC 2016
Pages152
Paragraphs4746
Words30506

Comments