skip to main content
10.1145/3573051.3596176acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication Pagesl-at-sConference Proceedingsconference-collections
short-paper

No Benefit for High-Dosage Time Management Interventions in Online Courses

Published:20 July 2023Publication History

ABSTRACT

In past work, time management interventions involving prompts, alerts, and planning tools have successfully nudged students in online courses, leading to higher engagement and improved performance. However, few studies have investigated the effectiveness of these interventions over time, understanding if the effectiveness maintains or changes based on dosage (i.e., how often an intervention is provided). In the current study, we conducted a randomized controlled trial to test if the effect of a time management intervention changes over repeated use. Students at an online computer science course were randomly assigned to receive interventions based on two schedules (i.e., high-dosage vs. low-dosage). We ran a two-way mixed ANOVA, comparing students' assignment start time and performance across several weeks. Unexpectedly, we did not find a significant main effect from the use of the intervention, nor was there an interaction effect between the use of the intervention and week of the course.

References

  1. Baker, R., Evans, B., Li, Q. and Cung, B. 2019. Does Inducing Students to Schedule Lecture Watching in Online Classes Improve Their Academic Performance? An Experimental Analysis of a Time Management Intervention. Research in Higher Education. 60, 4 (Jun. 2019), 521--552. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-018--9521--3.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Broadbent, J. and Poon, W.L. 2015. Self-regulated learning strategies & academic achievement in online higher education learning environments: A systematic review. The Internet and Higher Education. 27, (Oct. 2015), 1--13.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Claessens, B.J.C., van Eerde, W., Rutte, C.G. and Roe, R.A. 2007. A review of the time management literature. Personnel Review. 36, 2 (Feb. 2007), 255--276. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1108/00483480710726136.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Damgaard, M.T. and Nielsen, H.S. 2018. Nudging in education. Economics of Education Review. 64, (Jun. 2018), 313--342. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2018.03.008.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Davis, D., Chen, G., Jivet, I., Hauff, C. and Houben, G.-J. 2016. Encouraging Metacognition & Self-Regulation in MOOCs through Increased Learner Feedback. Learning Analytics and Knowledge Workshop. (2016).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Gupta, S. 2011. Intention-to-treat concept: A review. Perspectives in Clinical Research. 2, 3 (2011), 109. DOI:https://doi.org/10.4103/2229--3485.83221.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Kelly, W.E. 2002. Harnessing the river of time: a theoretical framework of time use efficiency with suggestions for counselors. Journal of Employment Counseling. 39, 1 (Mar. 2002), 12--21. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161--1920.2002.tb00504.x.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Kim, K.R. and Seo, E.H. 2015. The relationship between procrastination and academic performance: A meta-analysis. Personality and Individual Differences. 82, (Aug. 2015), 26--33. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.02.038.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Kizilcec, R.F. and Halawa, S. 2015. Attrition and Achievement Gaps in Online Learning. Proceedings of the Second (2015) ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale (Vancouver BC Canada, Mar. 2015), 57--66.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Kizilcec, R.F., Pérez-Sanagustín, M. and Maldonado, J.J. 2017. Self-regulated learning strategies predict learner behavior and goal attainment in Massive Open Online Courses. Computers & Education. 104, (Jan. 2017), 18--33. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.10.001.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Motz, B.A., Mallon, M.G. and Quick, J.D. 2021. Automated Educative Nudges to Reduce Missed Assignments in College. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies. 14, 2 (Apr. 2021), 189--200. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2021.3064613.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Nawrot, I. and Doucet, A. 2014. Building engagement for MOOC students: introducing support for time management on online learning platforms. Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on World Wide Web (Seoul Korea, Apr. 2014), 1077--1082.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. van Oldenbeek, M., Winkler, T.J., Buhl-Wiggers, J. and Hardt, D. 2019. Nudging in Blended Learning: Evaluation of Email-based Progress Feedback in a Flipped-classroom Information Systems Course. In Proceedings of the 27th European Conference on Information Systems (2019), 8--14.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Pérez-Álvarez, R., Maldonado-Mahauad, J. and Pérez-Sanagustín, M. 2018. Tools to Support Self-Regulated Learning in Online Environments: Literature Review. Lifelong Technology-Enhanced Learning. V. Pammer- Schindler, M. Pérez-Sanagustín, H. Drachsler, R. Elferink, and M. Scheffel, eds. Springer International Publishing. 16--30.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Wolters, C.A. and Brady, A.C. 2021. College Students' Time Management: a Self-Regulated Learning Perspective. Educational Psychology Review. 33, 4 (Dec. 2021), 1319--1351. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09519-z.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Xu, J. 2013. Why Do Students Have Difficulties Completing Homework? The Need for Homework Management. Journal of Education and Training Studies. 1, 1 (Feb. 2013), p98--105. DOI:https://doi.org/10.11114/jets.v1i1.78.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Yeomans, M. and Reich, J. 2017. Planning prompts increase and forecast course completion in massive open online courses. Proceedings of the Seventh International Learning Analytics & Knowledge Conference (Vancouver British Columbia Canada, Mar. 2017), 464--473.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Zimmerman, B.J. 2000. Attaining Self-Regulation: A Social Cognitive Perspective. Handbook of Self-Regulation. 13--39.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. No Benefit for High-Dosage Time Management Interventions in Online Courses

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Other conferences
        L@S '23: Proceedings of the Tenth ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale
        July 2023
        445 pages
        ISBN:9798400700255
        DOI:10.1145/3573051

        Copyright © 2023 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 20 July 2023

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • short-paper

        Acceptance Rates

        Overall Acceptance Rate117of440submissions,27%
      • Article Metrics

        • Downloads (Last 12 months)53
        • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)12

        Other Metrics

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader