Preparing Online Students for Comprehensive Examinations

Michelle S. Kanuth; E. Camellia St. John

doi:10.29074/ascls.23.3_Supplement.59

This article requires a subscription to view the full text. If you have a subscription you may use the login form below to view the article. Access to this article can also be purchased.

Michelle S. Kanuth, Ph.D., MLS, SBB⇑
1. Clinical Laboratory Sciences Department, University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, TX 77555-1140
E. Camellia St. John, M.Ed., MT(ASCP)SBB
1. Clinical Laboratory Sciences Department, University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, TX 77555-1140

Address of Correspondence: Michelle S. Kanuth, Ph.D., MLS, SBB, Professor, Clinical Laboratory Sciences Department, University of Texas Medical Branch, 301 University Boulevard, Galveston, TX 77555-1140, Phone: 409-772-3055, Email: mskanuth{at}utmb.edu

Upon completion of this article, the learner will be able to:

Identify two interventions that decreased the gap in examination scores for online students.
Correlate interventions with the problem area they were designed to improve.
Discuss the limitations of online reviewing.
Provide two reasons that immunology material may be more difficult to reinforce than other areas.
List the areas in which statistically significant differences were seen in the 2009 scores between on-campus and online students.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Identify and remedy difficulties in the preparation of online students for certification examination success.

DESIGN: The final examination scores for the CLS Seminar course for the 2008 class of 27 on-campus and 10 online students were compared for statistical differences in seven examination areas. Problem areas were identified and changes in the CLS Seminar course were made in 2009 to improve the scores of the online students. The examination scores for the 2009 class of 33 on-campus and 10 online students were studied to determine improvement. Student's two-tailed t-test was used to determine statistical significance of differences between scores of on-campus and online students.

INTERVENTIONS: Interactive video over the web; used to answer online student questions, review games, more class time, and more recorded review sessions; were added to the Seminar. The study guides provided during preceptorships were tied to the objectives of the seminar course and the questions on examinations. Specific objectives for each question missed on the final examinations were provided to the student.

RESULTS: In 2008, examination scores for online students were lower in two of seven areas by a statistically significant amount than on-campus students. The difference approached significance in a third area. After interventions in 2009, the examinations scores had equalized with the exception of one area, Immunology.

CONCLUSION: Increasing the amount and method of review in areas deemed important to online education was successful in improving examination scores.

ABBREVIATIONS: Chem= chemistry, hemat = hematology, immuno= immunology, micro= microbiology, urine= urinalysis, CLS=clinical laboratory science