Filtering by
- Creators: Bitter, Gary
- Creators: Bush, Jeffrey
In an effort to address the lack of literature in on-campus active travel, this study aims to investigate the following primary questions:<br/>• What are the modes that students use to travel on campus?<br/>• What are the motivations that underlie the mode choice of students on campus?<br/>My first stage of research involved a series of qualitative investigations. I held one-on-one virtual interviews with students in which I asked them questions about the mode they use and why they feel that their chosen mode works best for them. These interviews served two functions. First, they provided me with insight into the various motivations underlying student mode choice. Second, they provided me with an indication of what explanatory variables should be included in a model of mode choice on campus.<br/>The first half of the research project informed a quantitative survey that was released via the Honors Digest to attract student respondents. Data was gathered on travel behavior as well as relevant explanatory variables.<br/>My analysis involved developing a logit model to predict student mode choice on campus and presenting the model estimation in conjunction with a discussion of student travel motivations based on the qualitative interviews. I use this information to make a recommendation on how campus infrastructure could be modified to better support the needs of the student population.
The study consisted of four conditions: (a) an attitudinal and demographic pre-survey, (b) five mobile instructional modules, (c) mobile quizzes, and (d) an attitudinal post-survey. A total of 311 participants in higher education were enrolled in the study. One hundred thirty-seven participants completed all four conditions of the study. Participants were randomly assigned to experimental conditions in a 2 x 2 factorial design. The levels of the first factor, distribution of instructional content, were: once-per-day and once-per-week. The levels of the second factor, testing, were: a quiz after each module plus a comprehensive quiz and a single comprehensive quiz after all instruction. The dependent variable was learning outcomes in the form of quiz-score results. Attitudinal survey results were analyzed using Principal Axis Factoring to reveal three components, (a) student perceptions about the use of mobile devices in education,
(b) student perceptions about instructors’ beliefs for mobile devices for learning, and (c) student perceptions about the use of mobile devices post-instruction.
The results revealed several findings. There was no significant effect for type of delivery of instruction in a one-way ANOVA. There was a significant effect for testing in a one-way ANOVA There were no main effects of delivery and testing in a 2 x 2 factorial design and there was no main interaction effect, and there was a significant effect of testing on final quiz scores controlling for technical beliefs in a 2 x 2 ANCOVA. The significant difference in testing was contradictory to some literature.
Ownership of personal mobile devices in persons aged 18–29 is practically all-inclusive. Thus, future research on student attitudes and the implementation of personal smartphones for microlearning and testing is still needed to develop and integrate mobile-ready content for higher education.