Powell, Richard; Conway, Christopher; Ross, Lynda. “Effects of Student

Predisposing Characteristics on Student Success.” Journal of Distance

Education, Spring 1990: Vol.V, No. 1, pp. 5-19.

Introduction

When reading this research article, I had a difficult time separating the introduction from the literature review because they seemed to be intertwined. After reading the article several times, I was able to locate the necessary parts of the introduction. The first paragraph of the introduction seemed to set up the problem

“Why do some students succeed and others fail when using distance education?” The researchers felt, and I agree, that there was a need for the study because distance education is becoming more and more widely used. The purpose was stated in the fourth paragraph, although I thought that it was rather wordy and hard to understand until I got further into the study where it was explained more clearly. I felt that the authors did an excellent job of examining other related research and cited many different examples in the opening paragraphs. I felt that they made a convincing case that this study was needed by their statements that “The subject area is highly complex and multi-dimensional,” and “Research seems to be going in many directions at once and the results reported are often seemingly contradictory.” The statements were backed up by the examples of the other studies that they cited. They also classified and defined factors contributing to success and retention in distance education into three categories ( predisposing characteristics, life changes, and institutional characteristics) based on previous research.

Methodology

The setting was described as Athabasca University in Canada, which enrolls

about 11,000 students per year. Students can enroll and register throughout the year and set their own pace of study in a course. Most students study at home by using a correspondence package and may contact a telephone tutor weekly.

I felt that the sample size of three hundred one newly enrolled students was sufficient. The students were interviewed face-to-face before beginning their course work. Specific demographic data was not provided by the researchers, but it was stated that the sample, in general, was representative of the Edmonton area students. I would have liked to have read more specifics on the demographics of the sample.

For the purpose of this study, success was defined as whether newly enrolled students passed their first course at Athabasca University. A broader definition, including proportion of work completed in a single course, final grades received, and progress through a program of studies, would have required a very large sample for meaningful statistical analysis.

Dichotomous, categorical (mostly Likert scale measures) and continous data were the instruments used in collecting data. The multivariate technique selected for the data analysis was Discriminant Analysis. It was chosen because it analyzes the interactions among a number of “predictor” variables to arrive at a single score allowing you to predict outcomes on a case by case basis. The information provided can be used to classify future samples of individuals. I believe that the data collected by the researchers using these instruments showed both validity and reliability. I felt that the questions could be easily understood, increasing the reliability of the results. The results are appropriate, useful, and consistent. The researchers used appropriate statistical/analytical techniques.

The variables were chosen to measure factors predisposing students toward success or failure in their first course at Athabasca University. The variables were developed from existing literature on student success in distance education. Although the researchers tried to narrow down the variables somewhat, I believe that there were still too many variables.

Alternative Methods

At this point, I feel that the researchers were very thorough in their methodology and I don’t have any recommendations for alternative methods.

Results

According to the researchers, the primary variables responsible for discriminating between students who pass and those students who fail/withdraw were persistence, marital status, need for success, and need for support. Other variables that contributed to the significance of the function were students’ literacy score, financial stability, study habits, gender, and the students’ rating of previous educational preparation. Overall, based on the discriminant function, 68.7% of the students were classified correctly.

I felt that the results clearly related back to the original purpose of the study. I also felt that the data supported the author’s contention. There was enough data presented for someone to reach their own conclusions. The authors did a good job of keeping the presentation of results separate from interpretations. The results were well organized, and were made easier to understand by the use of tables.

Discussion and Conclusion

The authors did a good job identifying the limitations of the study. For example, they noted that although the study found that females were more likely to succeed in distance education than males, a previous analysis suggested that gender differences in completion rates are, at least partly, explainable by course choice. The authors stated that the set of factors that predict student success and persistence among Athabasca University students would not necessarily apply to other populations of distance learning students and other institutions. The characteristics would vary according to institutional factors, such as paced instruction or opportunities for group learning, and even life changes, such as divorce and unemployment. The research question is clearly answered by the conclusions, and the answers accurately reflect the results and interpretations of the data.

Suggestions for Further Research

Knowledge of students’ predisposing characteristics would allow a distance education organization to target intervention programs to those most in need. This should result in more efficient interventions. Therefore, I would like to see this study replicated in the United States, specifically in rural states such as South Dakota, because they are more likely to use distance education due to location. Following this study, I would like to see a study of intervention programs targeting those with characteristics most likely to predispose them to failure in distance education.