RUNNING HEAD: COMPARING MATH SUCCESS 1

Comparing Math Success:

Math Success Rate between a Blending Learning Classroom and a Traditional Math Classroom

Amber Gunnin
University of West Georgia

RUNNING HEAD: COMPARING MATH SUCCESS 2

Abstract
The basis of this research is to determine if the blended learning environment would be
more beneficial for high school students in a mathematics course than the traditional learning
environment. Technology is continuously growing and students are growing with the technology.
The research would be based on comparing two mathematics classes in the same course: one
course will be using blended learning while the other will be traditional. The data and statistics
gathered from students assessments, final exam and course grade will be used to determine
which approach is more successful.

RUNNING HEAD: COMPARING MATH SUCCESS 3

Comparing Math Success:

Math Success Rate between a Blending Learning Classroom and a Traditional Math Classroom
Students who do not take and pass rigorous math courses in high school are usually not
accepted into four-year colleges and universities. High schools are constantly looking for
students to be better prepared for college, especially with their mathematics courses. Students
often have a hard time relating to the material of their math classes so finding a solution can be
difficult. However, today, many schools are beginning to implement more technology based
concepts into the classroom to get more students interested. There are many ways technology is
being introduced, but the main focus for this research is comparing a blended learning classroom
with a traditional mathematics classroom.
The research for this study would be from a quantitative approach to compare student
success in the two different learning environments. The following research questions would be
used to guide this study:
1. Does the type of learning environment relate to successful course performance as
measured by test, final exam, and course grade?
2. How do students describe the productiveness of the blended learning environment
and traditional learning environment in a mathematics course?
3. How do the teachers describe the performance of the blended learning environment
versus the traditional learning environment in their mathematics course?
4. Do students in blended learning models show changes in academic achievement that
differ significantly from their peers in the traditional model?
The quantitative approach would be the most effective for this study because the results are
determined by student scores. Surveys would be conducted to determine the teacher and
students description of each type of course: blended versus traditional. Also, the data and

RUNNING HEAD: COMPARING MATH SUCCESS 4

statistics resulted from the students graded assignments, including their tests, final exam and
their overall course grade, will be used to determine the best type of learning environment for the
mathematics courses being compared.
Key Concepts
Students in a traditional math classroom are generally given a lecture followed by
practice problems and/or homework. They can either work individually, with a partner or with a
group. Everything is done on paper including classroom assignments, homework and all
assessments. The only type of technology used is either a scientific calculator or a graphing
calculator. As explained by Kohn (1999), As a result of the standard approach to math
instruction, students often cant take the methods theyve been taught and transfer them to
problems even slightly different from those theyre used to. (p. 1). Students are not able to
process information gathered in a traditional setting and they are having trouble combining all
the material together when it comes to the final assessment.
Students in a blended learning math classroom will be able to incorporate the instruction
given by the teacher along with their examples they can follow online. In a high school setting,
this would mean the student would attend class daily, as usual, but the assignments and
assessments will all be done on a computer. Each student will be assigned a computer to work
with daily in class, but they may or may not have one at home so most assignments would be
completed at school.
Literature Review
Most colleges and universities have many online classes along with blended learning
classes. Students coming from the high school setting might not be fully prepared for the type of

RUNNING HEAD: COMPARING MATH SUCCESS 5

discipline that an online class requires. Therefore, many high schools are starting to introduce
more technology into the curriculum, including blended learning classrooms. Rapposelli (2014)
described the issue, With this dramatic increase in online learning programs, school
administrators struggle to determine if online learning is as productive as traditional face-to-face
formatted classes. (p. 2). Also, teachers have to make sure they are actually using a blended
learning classroom effectively.
The struggle with blended learning is how much of the technology combined with faceto-face instruction counts as a blended learning environment.
Garrison & Kanuka (2004) described the struggle:
The real test of blended learning is the effective integration of the two main components
(face-to-face and Internet technology) such that we are not just adding on to the existing
dominant approach or method. This holds true whether it be a face-to-face or a fully
Internet-based learning experience. A blended learning design represents a significant
departure

from

either

of

these

approaches.

It

represents

fundamental

reconceptualization and reorganization of the teaching and learning dynamic, starting

with various specific contextual needs and contingencies (e.g., discipline, developmental
level, and resources). (p. 97).
All types of blended learning will occur in different subject areas, but it is important that each
subject area discusses their approach with one another. The section of the book, written by
Garrison & Kanuka (2004), discusses the importance of incorporating the two environments
together. For the mathematics classroom, each course should have a similar approach in their

RUNNING HEAD: COMPARING MATH SUCCESS 6

blended learning environment and decide how much technology should be integrated with the
face-to-face instruction.
This piece of literature goes into more detail about the importance of the planning
process, which is very important when introducing something new into education. As explained
by Garrison & Kanuka (2004), With respect to blended learning, operational planning involves
attending to the non-instructional components including the following: promotional and
advertising strategies; creating relationships for shared resources managing technology; and
creating an effective assessment process. (p. 101). With the high school setting, the promotional
and advertising strategies are not necessary, but managing technology and creating an effective
assessment process are very important. Teachers will have to be very explanatory of the
importance of caring for the technology provided to the students. If the students are not using
their resources productively, then blended learning cannot occur. Also, teachers will need to
collaborate to develop the best type of assessments to be given online.
Garrison & Kanuka (2004) also discuss three main resources needed for the blended
learning environment. The three resources are financial, human and technical. For the high
school math classroom, the main one the research will focus on is the human resources.
Garrison & Kanuka (2004) stated:
Individuals with instructional design, curriculum development, and technology skills are
necessary to support teaching faculty new to blended learning. In addition to these skills,
individuals who can provide personal attention and motivational strategies for teaching
faculty who are not convinced of the value of blended learning approaches are required.
(p.101).

RUNNING HEAD: COMPARING MATH SUCCESS 7

Most teachers today are going to accept the approach to blended learning, because education is
constantly changing and adding more technology into student courses. It is important that
teachers grow with education and change with society.
The piece of literature from Garrison & Kanuka gave a great insight into the future. The
article describes many possible issues that the blended learning environment could approach, but
gives great insight to the future of using blended learning in education. Having students more
interested in a subject, like mathematics, is important for the high school setting.
Methods
The method used for this study would be using the quantitative approach by comparing
students scores from assignments, test scores, final exams and overall course grades. The type of
research would be a combination of experimental and survey research. The experimental group
would consist of the students in the blended learning classroom while the control group would be
the students in the traditional classroom. The experimental group would receive the computer lab
and the access to the online math applications. The control group would take their math class
traditionally, as they have always done in the past. The groups would each be scheduled into
their mathematics course, as usual, so the groups are chosen by random selection.
Sample
The random selection of students would be around 120 students ranging in age from 1517 years in a tenth grade Analytic Geometry mathematics course. The students would be split
into around 60 students for blended learning and 60 students for traditional learning. It would be
a fairly even blend of males and females with many types of ethnic backgrounds including:
Caucasian, African American, Hispanic and students of two or more races. About half of these

RUNNING HEAD: COMPARING MATH SUCCESS 8

students are economically disadvantaged and are on the free and reduced lunch program at the
school. At the beginning of the course, each class would receive a survey about themselves and
their availabilities as far as using technology outside of the classroom. All students who have
passed the prerequisite, Coordinate Algebra, course are available to be included in the study.
Instrumentation
The main type of instrumentation used for this research study would be achievement
tests. For example, students will all take the pre-test and post-test for each unit and also the same
End of Course Milestone, given by the state. Teachers can use the data to compare the
achievement scores from each type of classroom. Also, performance tests would be used to
determine students performance on specific standards throughout the course. Each of these
instruments will have to be developed by the two teachers working together to create common
assessments.
Another type of instrumentation used will be questionnaires. This would be given to both
the teachers and the students to determine their thoughts and opinions on the classroom where
they were located. The questionnaires would help answer the research questions of how teachers
and students each describe the productiveness and performance of blended learning versus
traditional learning classrooms.
Data Analysis
Quantitative Study. For this quantitative research the null hypothesis would be students
do not benefit more from a blended learning classroom compared to a traditional learning math
classroom. The independent variable would be the teachers type of teaching methods. The
dependent variable would be the level the students achieved on their assessments. The types of

RUNNING HEAD: COMPARING MATH SUCCESS 9

variables will be teaching methods where one teacher lectures and the other uses mathematics
apps and computer programs for resources and examples.
Descriptive Analysis. The derived scores from each students tests would be used to
determine how well each student is doing comparatively. Those raw scores would be used to
make a grouped frequency distribution to determine if the data are skewed. The data from both
teachers would be collected separately to be able to compare the different scores. Also, averages
would be collected for each type of classroom on each assessment. Each classroom would be
checked for outliers who could possibly skew the data one way or another. The outliers would
then be removed to get a more accurate results of the mean of each classroom. The five number
summary of each classroom would be collected for the final exam to create two box plots. This
will compare the distributions of the final exam scores of each class taking the same final.
Regression Analysis. The statistical analysis to be used in this study would be a pre-post
matched pairs t-test. Shier, R. (2004) defined this as used to compare two population means
where you have two samples in which observations in one sample can be paired with
observations in the other sample. (p.1). The pairs t-test would be used to answer the research
question: Does the type of learning environment relate to successful course performance as
measured by test, final exam, and course grade? The data from the students scores would be
collected from both types of classroom environments. The independent variable would be the
two different types of teaching methods, while the dependent variable would be the students
scores on assessments. Once the data is obtained, students would be paired according to their
previous math scores to determine the difference in the scores. The differences would be used to
find the average and standard deviation. This data would be used to get the standard error and the

RUNNING HEAD: COMPARING MATH SUCCESS 10

test statistic to use the t-table to determine if the students scores are showing any differences
from the two teaching methods.
Scholarly Significance and Limitations
The contributions to my study would allow teachers to determine which method of
teaching may be more productive for students in mathematics classes. From the literature review
and other research articles, students are usually more engaged in the classroom when they are
allowed to use technology. With the blended learning classroom, they would be able to look up
more examples than what the teacher was able to show them and they are able to pull their
classroom materials up at home, if needed. Students will also benefit from beginning to learn
through blended learning because many of those who attend a college or university will
experience an online course. For the teachers, it could be a great stepping stone into
incorporating more technology into the math classroom to help engage more students.
Limitations
An overstatement of my research would be that all mathematics classes should be
blended learning or all classes should remain traditional, based on my research. My sample of
students would be a very small setting of Analytic Geometry (tenth grade) students, which does
not represent all math students. Therefore, the scores would come from a very small percentage
and only reflect about 120 students compared to a school of over 2200 students. This would not
be a great representation for all math courses. Another limitation would be for those students in
the blended learning classroom. Those students may or may not have the technology at home to
be able to complete assignments or look up extra examples outside of their classroom. It also
may take the teacher with the blended learning classroom some time to get comfortable with

RUNNING HEAD: COMPARING MATH SUCCESS 11

teaching this way so I believe a longer period of time would generate more accurate results.
Therefore, the data may not be entirely accurate.

RUNNING HEAD: COMPARING MATH SUCCESS 12

Resources
Garrison. R, & Kanuka. H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative
potential in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education. Volume 7, Issue 2, 2nd
Quarter 2004, Pages 95105.
Kohn, A. (1999). Getting the 3 Rs Right. In Houghton Mifflin (Ed.), The Schools Our
Children Deserve. (Boston).
Rapposelli J. (2014). Blended Learning Provides Pathway to Success for High School
Students.

Retrieved

from

https://thejournal.com/Articles/2014/10/22/Blended-Learning-

Provides-Pathway-to-Success-for-High-School-Students.aspx?Page=1
Shier, R. (2004). Statistics: 1.1 Paired Tests. Retrieved from
http://www.statstutor.ac.uk/resources/uploaded/paired-t-test.pdf

RUNNING HEAD: COMPARING MATH SUCCESS 13

Section
Not Evident
I. Introduction (1 page) 3 points
This section should include:
0
Background
Information
not provided.

Statement of the
research problem and
rationale for the study

Information
not provided.

Emerging

Proficient

Exemplary

1
Information
is provided
but is
unclear,
insufficient,
or
irrelevant.
The
research
problem is
stated, but
is unclear,
too
broad/narro
w or
irrelevant.
The
rationale for
the study is
unclear or
weak.

2
Information
is relevant
and
adequate
for the
proposed
study.
The
research
problem is
clearly
stated and
is
researchabl
e. Strong
rationale
provided.
The
rationale
statement
generally
justifies the
research
questions.

3
Information
is relevant,
sufficient,
and clearly
supports the
proposed
study.
The
research
problem is
clearly
stated,
relevant,
and
researchabl
e. Rationale
is extremely
clear,
compelling,
and clearly
supports the
research
questions.
There is a
clear link
between the
rationale
and the
research
questions.

1
Purpose is
not clearly
described.
Goals are
stated but

2
Purpose is
clearly
described.
Goals are
realistic,

3
Exceptionall
y clear in
purpose.
Goals are
realistic,

Objectives (1 page) 3 points

Purpose

0
The goals are
not stated.

RUNNING HEAD: COMPARING MATH SUCCESS 14

are unclear,
irrelevant,
or too
broad/narro
w.
Research Questions
and Hypotheses/
Propositions

Definitions of key
concepts used in the
research questions

Information
not provided
or no basis
for
judgment.

Key
concepts/ter
ms are not
defined.

Questions/
hypotheses/
propositions
are missing,
weak, or
unclear.
Questions
not of
sufficient
scope or are
not feasible.

Definitions
for key
concepts/ter
ms are
provided but
are
inaccurate
or unclear.

adequately
stated and
generally
aligned with
the research
problem.
Generally,
questions
have proper
scope, are
realistic,
feasible,
and
adequately
phrased.

clearly
stated, and
clearly
aligned with
the research
problem.
Research
questions
are clear,
concise,
feasible, of
proper
scope, and
answer the
purpose.
Each
research
question is
correctly
phrased,
and
addresses
only one
aspect of
the research
problem.

Definitions
for key
concepts/ter
ms are
provided
and
generally
adequate.

All key
concepts/ter
ms are
clearly
defined/
explained.

2
Some
evidence of
satisfactory
knowledge
with limited
critical
review of
the relevant
literature,

3
Evidence of
sound
knowledge
and critical
review of
the
literature
relevant to
the study.

Literature Review (2 pages) 3 points

Criteria:
Critical review of literature
Relevance
Conceptual/Theoretical
framework
Alignment

0
Information
is not
provided,
irrelevant,
incomplete,
and or
inaccurate.

1
Findings
from leading
researchers
are included
with
minimal
critical
commentary
.

RUNNING HEAD: COMPARING MATH SUCCESS 15

Cited
literature
may not be
relevant to
the study.

but with
gaps and or
omissions.
Conceptual/
theoretical
framework
is included;
however it
is not fully
developed
or justified.

Developed a
clear,
appropriate,
and justified
conceptual/
theoretical
framework
for the
research.

Methods (1.5 pages) 16 points

Type of study and research
design

0
No selection
or
justification
of research
approach
and design.

1
Research
approach
and design
are unclear,
inappropriat
e, or
underdevelo
ped.

2
Research
approach
and design
minimally
address the
research
questions
and goals.

Sampling

0
Little or no
evidence of a
sampling
procedure.

1
Limited
evidence of
an
appropriate
sampling
procedure.

2
Reasonable
evidence of
a feasible
sampling
procedure.

Instrumentation

0
No
information
provided.

1
Information
is limited or
instrumenta
tion is
inadequate.

2
Instrumenta
tion is
described
and can
provide the
information
needed to
respond to
the research
question(s).

3
Research
approach
and design
are realistic,
feasible,
clearly
described,
and aligned
with the
research
questions
and goals.
3-4
Sampling
procedure is
optimally
chosen, fully
justified,
and
feasible.
3-4
Instrumenta
tion is
optimally
chosen,
clearly
described,
and
feasible.

RUNNING HEAD: COMPARING MATH SUCCESS 16

Data Analysis

0
Little or no
evidence of a
data analysis
plan.

1
Limited
evidence of
an
appropriate
data
analysis
plan.
The
description
of data
analysis
procedures
is
incomplete
or contains
inaccuracies
.
Criteria for
the
interpretatio
n of results
are incorrect
or are not
provided.

2-3
Reasonable
evidence of
a realistic
data
analysis
plan.
A general
description
of the data
analysis
procedures
is provided.
Criteria for
the
interpretatio
n of results
are
incomplete.

4-5
Clear
evidence of
applying
appropriate
data
analysis
procedures,
which
adequately
address
research
questions
and goals.
Procedures
are
adequately
described.
The type of
results
provided by
these
methods is
indicated
and criteria
for
interpretatio
n are fully
and
accurately
explained.

Scholarly Significance and Limitations (1/2 pages) 3 points

Criteria:
Practical and
theoretical implications
Limitations

0
No
information
provided.

1
Minimal
recognition
of the
contribution
s and
limitations
of the study.

2
Recognition
of some
contribution
s and/or
limitations
of the study.

3
Recognition
and
adequate
explanation
of the
practical
and
theoretical
contribution
s and
limitations
of the study.

RUNNING HEAD: COMPARING MATH SUCCESS 17

Presentation and Writing - 2 points
Criteria:
Clarity
Writing mechanics
APA

Total:

/30

0
Generally
poor use of
English
characterize
d by
numerous
errors,
unclear,
incorrect
and/or
illogical
statements.

1
Reasonably
clear and
correct use
of English
characterize
d by
generally
clear
expression,
with
relatively
few
imprecise
and/or
incorrect
statements.

2
Clear and
correct use
of English
characterize
d by a clear
style of
expression,
with few
imprecise
and/or
incorrect
statements.