11 / 36
Page 66
Notes:
Journal of Palliative Care & Medicine | ISSN: 2165-7386 | Volume 8
August 27-28, 2018 | Boston, USA
4
th
International Conference on
Palliative Care, Medicine and Hospice Nursing
Comparison of active and passive learning modules and student engagement levels in an online course
Beverly Gish
and
Dale Hilty
Mount Carmel College of Nursing, USA
S
tudent engagement has been defined as “the level of interest demonstrated by students, how they interact with each other
in the course, and their motivation to learn about the topics” (Gray & DiLoreto, 2016, p. 5). Online learning environments
are challenged to develop strategies that will engage students, to improve student retention and maximize student achievement
of course objectives. Therefore, different online learning strategies require an assessment to determine their effectiveness at
enhancing student engagement. Hilty, Gill-Rocha, Parkinson, Blackford, & Cook (2018) evaluated the psychometric properties
of the Burch et al., (2014) 63-item Student Engagement Survey (SES). Exploratory principal axis factor analysis (EPAFA) was
used to determine the number of underlying factors. Using the scree test to determine the number of factors, the EPAFA
with an oblimin rotation suggested four factors. The scree test indicated four factors (eigen values: 17.176, 3.807, 2.942,
and 2.151) accounting for 63.6% of the variance. Forty-one (41) of the 63 items loaded on one of the physical engagement,
cognitive engagement, deep learning engagement, and engagement skills factors. Coefficient alpha reliability estimates were
.921 (Physical), .961 (Cognitive), .905 (Deep Learning), and .937 (Engagement Skills). Masters level graduate nursing students
completed the 41 questions designed to measure student engagement. Advanced Pathophysiology students completed an
educational intervention based on passive learning and active learning modules for this online course. Learning activities,
such as textbook readings, videos, and quizzes, were the same for all modules. The difference was in the discussion of the
case studies. Using SPSS 25, the dependent t-test analyzed the passive and active learning approaches by comparing student
responses to the physical, cognitive, deep learning, and engagement skill factors.
Biography
Beverly Gish is an Assistant Professor working as a nurse for 40 years and has diverse career experiences in direct patient care, staff education, nursing
management, and finally nursing education. She started her career on a busy gynecology/oncology unit, moving to critical care, then the emergency department,
and finally a specialty in neurosurgery. Currently, she had returned to direct patient care and practice as a certified nurse practitioner (CNP) in a primary care
(community clinic) setting. She loves the insight it gives her in the teaching environment. Professionally, she has fifteen years’ experience of teaching nursing.
bgish@mccn.eduBeverly Gish et al., J Palliat Care Med 2018, Volume 8
DOI: 10.4172/2165-7386-C3-021