2011 Student Readiness Report - USIAccording to Sloan-C (Going the Distance: Online Education in the United States, 2011) over 6.1 million students were taking at least one online

SmarterServices.com

877 499 SMARTER

[email protected]

2012 Student Readiness Report

[email protected] ~ 1.877.499.SMARTER

2 2012 Student Readiness Report

INTRODUCTION

According to Sloan-C (Going the Distance: Online Education in the United States, 2011) over 6.1 million

students were taking at least one online course during the fall 2010 term, an increase of 560,000 students

over the previous year. The 10% growth rate for online enrollments far exceeds the 2% growth in the

overall higher education student population. Thirty-one percent of higher education students now take at

least one course online. Sixty-five percent of higher education institutions now say that online learning is

a critical part of their long-term strategy.

In addition to the increased numbers of online courses, many institutions are now providing hybrid

courses which are combinations of online and on-campus delivery systems. Even fully on-campus

courses often use learning management systems and other technology to distribute content and foster

collaboration and communication within the course.

Previous studies found that among academic leaders, 64 percent believe that it takes more discipline for

a learner to succeed in an online course (Sloan Consortium, 2006 & 2007), therefore, placing additional

responsibility on students to be self-directed learners. Many of the students taking online, hybrid or

technology rich courses are adult learners who are returning to college after several years with family

and/or in the work force. Other students are traditional aged college students who have studied in

primary and secondary schools with little or no technology integration or distance learning experience.

To what degree are these students ready to learn in a distance or technology rich environment?

What types of support would be beneficial to help these students succeed at learning in a new paradigm?

The purpose of the 2012 Student Readiness Report is to provide summary data from thousands of

students at hundreds of colleges regarding their reported levels of readiness for studying online or in a

technology rich environment. This data can inform educational leaders as they design and provide

instruction and support students who are studying at a distance. The information in this report is

aggregate data taken from the students’ scores on the SmarterMeasure Learning Readiness Indicator

between the dates of July 1, 2011 and June 30, 2012. Data from secondary school students and trial

accounts was not included in this report.

The SmarterMeasure Learning Readiness Indictor is a web-based, 124-item assessment which measures

a learner's readiness for succeeding in an online learning program or in a technology rich environment.

SmarterMeasure is one of the services provided by SmarterServices, and it indicates the degree to which

an individual student possesses attributes, skills and knowledge that contribute to success in online

learning.

The purpose of the SmarterMeasure Learning Readiness Indicator is not to measure levels of academic

skills. SmarterMeasure is designed to measure the levels of the non-cognitive traits, attributes and skills

that learners possess that make distance learning or technology rich learning a good fit for them.



SmarterMeasure includes six major assessment components that measure.

Individual attributes – motivation, procrastination, etc.

Learning styles – based on the multiple intelligences model

Technical skills – skills and knowledge of computer/Internet usage

Life Factors – availability of time, support from others, health, etc.

Reading rate & recall

Typing speed & accuracy

This is the fourth year that this report has been produced. In 2011 the title of the report was changed

from the National Online Student Readiness Report to the Student Readiness Report to accommodate

the fact that students in Canada and Puerto Rico are represented as well as students taking hybrid and/or

technology rich on-campus courses.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

Demographic Profile: In the twelve month period represented in this report, a total of 690,479

SmarterMeasure assessments were taken. This is an 88% increase of 365,927 assessments from the

prior year which had seen a 72% increase over the 2010 total of 211,339. For the purpose of this report,

data from the K-12 students as well as all data from demonstration accounts was removed. Also for the

purposes of this analysis only, records of persons who completed the entire exam were included. A total

of 303,872 complete records were analyzed to determine descriptive statistics. A random sample of 2%

(N= 6031) complete records was selected for the comparison of means across the demographic

variables.

The SmarterMeasure Learning Readiness Indicator was developed in 2002. Since then usage of the

assessment has consistently increased each year.

0

100000

200000

300000

400000

500000

600000

700000

02

- 0

3

03

- 0

4

04

- 0

5

05

- 0

6

06

- 0

7

07

- 0

8

08

- 0

9

09

- 1

0

10

- 1

1

11

-12



Of the 690,479 SmarterMeasure testing instances from July 1, 2011 and June 30, 2012:

70% were female (2011 = 71%, 2010 = 72%, 2009 = 66%)

59% were Caucasian/White (2011 = 62%, 2010 = 59%, 2009 = 61%)

The percentage of students who have never taken an online course is decreasing. (2012 = 54%,

2011 = 55%, 2010 = 60%, 2009 = 65%) This is an indicator that distance learning is becoming a

more common educational delivery system.

35% were traditional aged (18 – 22 years old) college students (2011 = 30%, 2010 = 28%, 2009 32%)

52% were students at an associate’s level institution (2011 = 45%, 2010 = 55%, 2009 = 67%)

80% were from public institutions and 20% were from private institutions. This figure excludes the large set of data from one major for-profit institution.

22% had “social” as their dominant learning style (2011 = 22%, 2010 = 28%, 2009 = 28%)

45% scored within the 80% to 89% range on the individual attributes scale (2011 = 45%, 2010 = 45%, 2009 = 42%)

27% recalled 90% or more of the reading passage (2011 = 27%, 2010 = 28%, 2009 = 28%)

32% demonstrated 100% accuracy on the typing skills test (2011 = 30%, 2010 = 29%, 2009 = 27%) and typed an average of 27.73 words per minute (2011, 27.46, 2010 = 27.64, 2009 28.02)

37% exhibited between 70% - 79% of mastery of technical knowledge (2011 = 37%, 2010 = 33%, 2009 = 33%)

52% scored 100% on the technical competency skills tests (2011 = 53%, 2010 = 45%, 2009 = 58%)

43% scored 80% - 89% on the life factors section (2011 = 44%) Four-Year Trend Analysis This is the fourth year that the Student Readiness Report has been produced. An analysis of the frequency data over the past four years yields some interesting observations about trends in distance learning.

Females continue to take more distance learning courses than males.

Ethnic diversity among distance learning students is remaining relatively constant.

Fewer students are experiencing distance learning for the first time.

Distribution of ages of distance learning students is remaining somewhat constant.

Distance learning is becoming more common across all institution types.

Social continues to be the dominant learning style.

Individual attributes scores are remaining constant.

Reading recall scores are remaining constant.

Typing skills are gradually improving.

Technical knowledge scores are gradually improving.

Technical competency scores are remaining within a constant range.

2009 2010 2011 2012

Female 66% 72% 71% 70%

Caucasian/White 61% 59% 62% 59%



New to Online Learning 65% 60% 55% 54%

Traditional Age 32% 28% 30% 35%

Associates Level 67% 55% 45% 52%

Social as Dominant Learning Style 28% 28% 22% 22%

80% - 89% on Individual Attributes 42% 45% 45% 45%

Recalled 90% + on Reading 28% 28% 27% 27%

100% Accurate on Typing 27% 29% 30% 32%

70% to 79% on Technical Knowledge 33% 33% 37% 37%

100% on Technical Competency 58% 45% 53% 52%



A matrix was developed to illustrate the trends over a four year period of demographic factors that have had statistically significant higher means. A profile of a successful distance learning student is emerging with four demographic variables having a statistically significant higher mean for four years in a row on one or more constructs measured by SmarterMeasure.

Females have had the highest means for four years in Individual Attributes, Academic Attributes and Time Management.

Males have had the highest means for four years in Technical Knowledge.

Caucasians have had the highest means for four years in Technical Knowledge.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

2009

2010

2011

2012



Students who have taken five or more online courses have had the highest means for four years in Individual Attributes, Technical Knowledge and Procrastination.

Matrix of Variables With Statistically Significant Higher Means By Year

Lea

rnin

g S

tyle

s

Indiv

idua

l A

ttrib

ute

s

Re

ad

ing R

ecall

Re

ad

ing R

ate

Typin

g A

ccu

racy

Typin

g R

ate

Tech

nic

al K

now

ledg

e

Life

Fa

cto

rs

Aca

de

mic

Attrib

ute

s

He

lp S

eekin

g

Pe

rsis

ten

ce

Pro

cra

stin

atio

n

Tim

e M

anag

em

ent

Locu

s o

f C

ontr

ol

Females **** ** * **** * ****

Males *** ****

Caucasian ** * * **** * *

African American * * *** *** * *

Asian * ** * * *

American Indian * ** * * ** * * * *

Latino/Hispanic *

5 Prior Courses ** **** * ** **** * ** ** ** **** *** *

4 Prior Courses * * * *

3 Prior Courses *

13-17 *

18-22 *

23-27 ** *

28-32 **

33-37 **

38-42 *

43-47 * *

48-52 * * * * *

53-59 * * * * ** **

60+ ** * * ** *** * **

Baccalaureate College * ** * ** * *** **

Corporation * * * *

Special Focus Institution ** * * * * **



Doctorate Granting * **

Private for-profit

*

Private not-for-profit * * * * * * *

Public

*

*

KEY * 9 * 10 * 11 * 12

DESCRIPTION OF FINDINGS

Gender: Of the students taking SmarterMeasure during the 2011/2012 academic year, and of those who

reported gender, 70% were female and 30% were male.

Independent sample t-tests were calculated to determine if there are statistically significant differences

between the means of gender and the constructs measured by SmarterMeasure. For scoring and

reporting purposes each of the constructs measured by SmarterMeasure are quantified on a 0 to 100

scale. This scale is considered the composite score for that construct.

Females were found to have statistically significant higher means on the construct of individual attributes.

Males were found to have statistically significant higher means on the constructs of reading rate and

technical knowledge. It should be noted that for many students, a high reading rate could be interpreted

as a negative attribute since it may indicate that the student skimmed the passage.

Using an independent samples t-test, significant differences were found with females having higher

means in the factors of academic attributes and time management. This finding was parallel from the prior

year.

Ethnicity: The majority of students included in this report were Caucasian / White (59%). The second

largest group was African American (24%).

Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was calculated to determine if there are statistically significant differences

between the means of the different ethnic groups and the constructs measured by SmarterMeasure.

Statistically significant differences in means were reported in seven of the eight constructs based on

ethnicity. The twenty-four American Indian test takers who were randomly selected for this analysis were

an exemplary group with the highest means in Individual Attributes, Reading Recall, Typing Accuracy,

Technical Knowledge and Life Factors. African-Americans reported the highest means for Reading Rate.

Caucasian/White reported the highest means for Technical Competency. African Americans reported the

highest means in the categories of Persistence and Procrastination. American Indians reported the

highest means in Help Seeking and Time Management. Caucasian/White reported the highest means in

Locus of Control



Number of Online Courses Taken: Institutions typically provide SmarterMeasure to students who have

not yet taken an online or technology rich course. However, students who are new to one institution may

have already taken an online course at another institution. This fact may impact their level of readiness to

learn online. As a result, a demographic question is asked in SmarterMeasure to measure the number of

online courses a student has already taken. The majority (54%) of students reported that they had never

taken an online course prior to taking the SmarterMeasure assessment. The percentage of students who

have never taken an online course is decreasing. (2012 = 54%, 2011 = 55%, 2010 = 60%, 2009 = 65%)

This is an indicator that distance learning is becoming a more common educational delivery system.

Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was calculated to determine the impact that a person taking prior online

courses has on their readiness. The results demonstrated that experience matters with online learning.

In each of the eight constructs measured, as persons took more online courses their readiness measures

improved. The differences in the means were statistically significant in six of the eight groups. The

greatest difference in means from students with no prior online course experience and those who had

taken five or more courses continued to be in the area of technical knowledge. This indicates that with

experience students can learn to use the technology required for online courses.

Learners who had taken five or more prior online courses had statistically significant higher means for the

constructs of Individual Attributes, Typing Accuracy, Technical Knowledge, Technical Competency and

Life Factors. Those who had taken four prior courses had the highest means for Reading Recall.

Age Range: Learners are asked to report their age range. A large percentage (35%) of students taking

SmarterMeasure during Academic Year 2011 – 2012 were traditional age college students (18 – 22).

Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was calculated to determine if differences exist between age ranges.

Significant differences did exist in four of the eight of the constructs measured. Generally speaking, age

does matter as demonstrated below. For constructs related to personal maturity, older students had the

highest means. For constructs related to technical matters, younger students had the highest means.

This was consistent with the prior three years’ findings. It should be noted that N=41 for persons in the

60+ age range in the random sample.

Institution Type: Educational institutions using SmarterMeasure are classified by the type of institution.

Available types include (1) Doctorate-granting University, (2) Master’s College or University, (3)

Baccalaureate College, (4) Associates College and (5) Special Focus Institution.

The majority (63%) of participants were from Doctorate-Granting institutions. Twenty-two percent were

from Associates Colleges, and 11% were from Master’s Degree Granting institutions. This data is

skewed by the fact that the institution which has the highest usage of the assessment is a Doctorate-

Granting institution. Removing the data from that large institution reveals a distribution of 52% Associates

Colleges, 26% Master’s Degree Granting institutions and 13% Doctorate-Granting Universities.



Excluding data from the large for-profit, 80% of data was from public institutions and 20% from private

institutions.

Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was calculated to determine if differences exist between students of

different types of institutions. Significant differences did exist on six of the eight constructs measured.

Baccalaureate institutions had a statistically significant higher mean in the construct of Reading Rate,

while Doctorate-granting Universities had the highest mean for Technical Competency. Special Focus

Institutions had statistically significant higher means in Individual Attributes, Reading Recall, Technical

Knowledge and Life Factors.

Comparisons were also made between for-profit and non-for-profit institutions. Statistically significant

differences in means existed in six of the eight constructs measured. Public institutions had the highest

mean for Life Factors. Private non-for-profits institutions, which historically have higher admissions

standards, had the highest means for Individual Attributes, Reading Recall, Technical Knowledge and

Technical Competency.

Dominant Learning Styles: Students learn using a variety of learning styles. Most persons are able to

adapt their learning style to the format of the content. However, many persons do have a dominant

learning style which defines their preferred method of receiving information. This analysis found that the

most common dominant learning style was Social at 22%. (2011 = 22%, 2010 = 28%, 2009 = 28%) The

least common dominant learning style was Visual (7%). The percentages of each learning style were

within one percentage point of the prior year’s measurement. This is an indicator of the reliability of the

learning styles instrument. This finding is of interest to instructional designers who seek to construct

online courses which appeal across the learning styles.

Individual Attributes: On the SmarterMeasure assessment, students are asked several questions which

quantify their levels of individual attributes. The following individual attributes are measured: (1) help

seeking, (2) time management, (3) procrastination, (4) persistence, (5) academic attributes, and (6) locus

of control. These six individual attributes are reported in aggregate on a scale of 0 to 100 with 100

indicating a very high level of the attributes. Forty-five percent of students scored within the 80 – 89%

range. The distribution of Individual Attributes scores is parallel to the findings of prior years. (80 – 89%

range - 2012 = 45%, 2011 = 45%, 2010 = 45%, 2009 = 42%)

Reading Rate and Recall: On the SmarterMeasure assessment, students read a brief passage and then

complete a quiz to measure the degree to which they can recall the information. The rationale is that

much information in online courses is presented via text on-screen, and a person’s ability to remember

what they have read is important. This report is encouraging in that 27% of students recalled 90% or

more of what they read. Twenty-five percent recalled 80% – 89% of what they read. So over half of the

students recalled 80% or more of what they had read. These findings were parallel to the prior year.

The average reading words per minute was 376 which was an improvement over the prior two years

which yielded an average of 339 (2011) and 305 (2010). The average adult reading speed of the general



American population is 200 – 250 words per minute. However, one should not place too much stock in

reading rate. Some students skim over the reading passage in SmarterMeasure and do not take the time

to appropriately read it. As schools have conversations with students, they discuss the reality that when

reading academic content, readers must not try to read too quickly.

Typing Speed and Accuracy: The average typing speed was 27.73 words per minute. (2011 = 27.46,

2010 = 27.64, 2009 = 28.02) This figure is the Adjusted Words Per Minute and is adjusted to factor in the

number of errors. However, the standard deviation of Adjusted Words Per Minute was high at 40.105, so

considerable variance was exhibited in typing skills among students who took SmarterMeasure during

this academic year. Overall, students demonstrated a high degree of accuracy when typing. Thirty-two

percent of students demonstrated 100% accuracy on the typing skills test. (2011 – 31%, 2010 – 29%)

Technical Knowledge: On the SmarterMeasure assessment, students are asked a series of questions

which measure the degree to which they possess knowledge about technical terms and software usage.

Technical Knowledge is measured on a scale of 0 – 100 with 100 being a high degree of Technical

Knowledge. Thirty-seven percent of students exhibited between 70% – 79% of mastery of technical

knowledge. (2011 = 37%, 2010 = 33%, 2009 = 33%)

Technical Competency: Students are asked to complete a series of skill tests to demonstrate their level

of competency with basic technical tasks. Overall, students performed well on this element of

SmarterMeasure with 52% scoring 100%. (2011 = 53%, 2010 = 45%, 2009 = 58%)

Life Factors: On the SmarterMeasure assessment, students are asked a series of questions which

measure several factors that are external to the learner. These factors include: availability of time,

appropriateness of a place to study, one’s reason for taking online courses, resources available to the

learner and academic skills. Forty-three percent scored in the 80% - 89% range.

BRIEF LITERATURE REVIEW ON LEARNER READINESS

Before the start of an online program or course, it should be determined if a learner’s instructional need

can be resolved through a distance education approach (Willis & Lockee, 2004). Assessing the pre-

requisite skills of the distance learner is critical (Hsiu-Mei & Liaw, 2004; Simonson et al., 2003). Learners

need to have enough prerequisite skills of technological proficiency and a strong motivation to learn by

technology (Hsiu-Mei & Liaw, 2004). Because of the difficulty in accommodating a group of learners with

a wide range of acquired skills, requirements for prerequisite skills should be set (Falvo & Solloway,

2004).

Pamela Dupin-Bryant of Utah State University conducted a study which was published in The American

Journal of Distance Education titled “Pre-entry Variables Related to Retention in Online Distance

Education.” This study identified pre-entry variables related to course completion and non-completion in

university online distance education courses. Four hundred and sixty-four students who were enrolled in

online distance education courses participated in the study. Discriminate analysis revealed six pre-entry



variables were related to retention, including cumulative grade point average, class rank, number of

previous courses completed online, searching the Internet training, operating systems and file

management training and Internet applications training. Results indicate prior educational experience and

prior computer training may help distinguish between individuals who complete university online distance

education courses and those who do not. SmarterMeasure measures all of the variables that this study

identified as indicators of success, except for class rank.

Literature Review Resources

Dupin-Bryant, P. A. (2004). Pre-entry variables related to retention in online distance education.

American Journal of Distance Education, 18(4), 199-206.

Falvo, D. A., & Solloway, S. (2004). Constructing community in a graduate course about teaching with

technology. TechTrends: Linking Research & Practice to Improve Learning, 48(5), 56.

Hsiu-Mei, H., & Liaw, S.-S. (2004). Guiding distance educators in building web-based instructions.

International Journal of Instructional Media, 31(2), 125.

Simonson, M., Smaldino, S., Albright, M., & Zvacek, S. (2003). Teaching and learning at a distance.

Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.

Willis, L. L., & Lockee, B. B. (2004). A pragmatic instructional design model for distance learning.

International Journal of Instructional Media, 31(1), 9.



2012 SUMMARY DATA AND ANALYSIS

Data were collected for this report from students who took the SmarterMeasure assessment from July 1,

2011, to June 30, 2012. These users were students taking online and/or technology rich courses during

the 2011/2012 academic year. In the twelve month period represented in this report, a total of 690,479

SmarterMeasure assessments were taken. This is an 88% increase of 365,927 assessments from the

prior year which had seen a 72% increase over the 2010 total of 211,339. For the purpose of this report,

data from the K-12 students as well as all data from demonstration accounts was removed. A random

sample of 2% (N = 6,031) complete records was selected for the comparison of means across the

demographic variables.

DEMOGRAPHIC FREQUENCIES

Gender: Of the students taking SmarterMeasure during the 2011/2012 academic year and of those who

reported gender, 70% were female and 30% were male.

Gender Distribution

59232, 30%

140424, 70%

Male

Female



Ethnicity: The majority of students included in this report were Caucasian / White (59%). The second

largest group was African American (24%).

Ethnicity N %

African-American 46493 24%

Alaskan Native 175 0%

American Indian 1486 1%

Asian or Pacific Islander 6171 3%

Caucasian/White 111884 59%

Latino / Hispanic 18357 10%

Other race 5097 3%

It should be noted that schools do have the option to opt out of asking this question to students, and if schools do ask the ethnicity question, it is not a required question.

African-American

24%

Alaskan Native

0%

American Indian

1% Asian or Pacific

Islander 3%

Caucasian/White

59%

Latino / Hispanic

10%

Other race 3%



Number of Online Courses Taken: Institutions typically provide SmarterMeasure to students who have

not yet taken an online or technology rich course. However, students who are new to one institution may

have already taken an online course at another institution. This fact may impact their level of readiness to

learn online. As a result, a demographic question is asked in SmarterMeasure to measure the number of

online courses a student has already taken. The majority (54%) of students reported that they had never

taken an online course prior to taking the SmarterMeasure assessment. The percentage of students who

have never taken an online course is decreasing. (2012 = 54%, 2011 = 55%, 2010 = 60%, 2009 = 65%)

This is an indicator that distance learning is becoming a more common educational delivery system.

Number of Prior Online Courses Taken

113174

24268 18493

12763 9118

30586

0

20000

40000

60000

80000

100000

120000

0 1 2 3 4 5+



Age Range: Learners are asked to report their age range. A large percentage (35%) of students taking

SmarterMeasure during Academic Year 2011/2012 were traditional age college students (18 – 22).

Distribution of Age Ranges

6963

72524

36885

26266

19925

16008

11898

8832

6127

1780

0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000 80000

13-17

18-22

23-27

28-32

33-37

38-42

43-47

48-52

53-59

60+



Institution Type: Educational institutions using SmarterMeasure are classified by the type of institution.

Available types include (1) Doctorate-granting University, (2) Master’s College or University, (3)

Baccalaureate College, (4) Associates College, and (5) Special Focus Institution.

The majority (63%) of participants were from Doctorate-Granting institutions. Twenty-two percent were

from Associates Colleges, and 11% were from Master’s Degree granting institutions. This data is skewed

by the fact that the institution which has the highest usage of the assessment is a Doctorate-granting

institution. Removing the data from that large institution reveals a distribution of 52% Associates

Colleges, 26% Master’s Degree granting institutions and 13% Doctorate-granting Universities. Excluding

data from the large for-profit, 80% of data was from public institutions and 20% from private institutions.

Distribution of Institution Type

52%

5%

13%

26%

4% Associates College

BaccalaureateCollege

Doctorate-grantingUniversity

Master’s Colleges and University

Special FocusInstitution

19%

1%

80%

Private for-profit

Private not-for-profit

Public



SECTION FREQUENCIES

Dominant Learning Styles: Students learn using a variety of learning styles. Most persons are able to adapt their learning style to the format of the content. However, many persons do have a dominant learning style which defines their preferred method of receiving information. This analysis found that the most common dominant learning style was Social at 22%. (2011 = 22%, 2010 = 28%, 2009 = 28%) The least common dominant learning style was Visual (7%). The percentages of each learning style were within one percentage point of the prior year’s measurement. This is an indicator of the reliability of the learning styles instrument. This finding is of interest to instructional designers who seek to construct online courses which appeal across the learning styles.

Distribution of Dominant Learning Styles

Social 22%

Verbal 18%

Logical 18%

Solitary 13%

Aural 13%

Physical 9% Visual

7%

0

20000

40000

60000

80000

100000

120000

140000

Social Verbal Logical Solitary Aural Physical Visual



Individual Attributes: On the SmarterMeasure assessment, students are asked several questions which

quantify their levels of individual attributes. The following individual attributes are measured: (1) help

seeking, (2) time management, (3) procrastination, (4) persistence, (5) academic attributes and (6) locus

of control. These six individual attributes are reported in aggregate on a scale of 0 to 100 with 100

indicating a very high level of the attributes. Forty-five percent of students scored within the 80 – 89%

range. The distribution of Individual Attributes scores is parallel to the findings of prior years. (80 – 89%

range - 2012 = 45%, 2011 = 45%, 2010 = 45%, 2009 = 42%)

Scores on the Individual Attributes Assessment

0

20000

40000

60000

80000

100000

120000

140000

160000

30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70-79 80-89 90-100



Reading Rate and Recall: On the SmarterMeasure assessment, students read a brief passage and then

complete a quiz to measure the degree to which they can recall the information. The rationale is that

much information in online courses is presented via text on-screen, and a person’s ability to remember

what they have read is important. This report is encouraging in that 27% of students recalled 90% or

more of what they read. Twenty-five percent recalled 80% – 89% of what they read. So over half of the

students recalled 80% or more of what they had read. These findings replicated the findings from the

prior year.

The average reading words per minute was 376 which was an improvement over the prior two years

which yielded an average of 339 (2011) and 305 (2010). The average adult reading speed of the general

American population is 200 – 250 words per minute. However, one should not place too much stock in

reading rate. Some students skim over the reading passage in SmarterMeasure and do not take the time

to appropriately read it. As schools have conversations with students, they discuss the reality that when

reading academic content, readers must not try to read too quickly.

Scores on the Reading Recall Assessment

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

70000

80000

90000

Lessthan10%

10 -19%

20 -29%

30 -39%

40 -49%

50 -59%

60 -69%

70 -79%

80 -89%

90 -100%



Typing Speed and Accuracy: The average typing speed was 27.73 words per minute. (2011 = 27.46,

2010 = 27.64, 2009 = 28.02) This figure is the Adjusted Words Per Minute and is adjusted to factor in the

number of errors. However, the standard deviation of Adjusted Words Per Minute was high at 40.105, so

considerable variance was exhibited in typing skills among students who took SmarterMeasure during

this academic year. Overall, students demonstrated a high degree of accuracy when typing. Thirty-two

percent of students demonstrated 100% accuracy on the typing skills test. (2011 – 31%, 2010 – 29%)

Distribution of Typing Accuracy

0

20000

40000

60000

80000

100000

120000

140000

160000

Lessthan10%

10 -19%

20 -29%

30 -39%

40 -49%

50 -59%

60 -69%

70 -79%

80 -89%

90 -99%

100%



Technical Knowledge: On the SmarterMeasure assessment, students are asked a series of questions

which measure the degree to which they possess knowledge about technical terms and software usage.

Technical Knowledge is measured on a scale of 0 – 100 with 100 being a high degree of Technical

Knowledge. Thirty-seven percent of students exhibited between 70% – 79% of mastery of technical

knowledge. (2011 = 37%, 2010 = 33%, 2009 = 33%)

Scores on Technical Knowledge

0

20000

40000

60000

80000

100000

120000

Lessthan10%

10 -19%

20 -29%

30 -39%

40 -49%

50 -59%

60 -69%

70 -79%

80 -89%

90 -99%

100%



Technical Competency: Students are asked to complete a series of skill tests to demonstrate their level

of competency with basic technical tasks. Overall, students performed well on this element of

SmarterMeasure with 52% scoring 100%. (2011 = 53%, 2010 = 45%, 2009 = 58%)

Scores on Technical Competency

0

20000

40000

60000

80000

100000

120000

140000

160000

180000

Lessthan10%

10 -19%

20 -29%

30 -39%

40 -49%

50 -59%

60 -69%

70 -79%

80 -89%

90 -99%

100%



Life Factors: On the SmarterMeasure assessment, students are asked a series of questions which

measure several factors that are external to the learner. These factors include: availability of time,

appropriateness of a place to study, one’s reason for taking online courses, resources available to the

learner and academic skills. Forty-three percent scored in the 80% - 89% range.

Scores on Life Factors

0

20000

40000

60000

80000

100000

120000

140000

160000

180000

0 -10%

10 -19%

20 -29%

30 -39%

40 -49%

50 -59%

60 -69%

70 -79%

80 -89%

90 -100%



COMPARISON OF MEANS

Because this data set is so large (N=690,479), any comparison of means such as an independent sample

t-test or an ANOVA will yield a statistically significant difference due to the magnitude of the sample size.

To control for this impractical significance, a random sample of 2% (N=6031) of the full data set was

selected for analysis in this section. Random cases were selected using the random sample tool in SPSS

(Statistical Program for Social Sciences).

It should be noted that when interpreting means for Reading Rate that a higher mean rate may not truly

be indicative of faster readers. It could be indicative of readers who skimmed the passages instead of

properly reading it. The average English-speaking adult reading speed when reading for comprehension

is 200 – 250 words per minute. Mean reading speeds in excess of that should be evaluated accordingly.

To test this assumption, discriminant analysis was computed to determine if one’s reading rate could be

used to indicate their reading recall. Readers who likely skimmed the passaged were identified as those

having reading rates of 400 wpm or higher. Using these two groups of normal and abnormally high

readers, discriminant analysis was able to correctly classify their reading recall on a scale of 0 – 100

based on their reading rate 72.9% of the time. So more than 7 out of 10 times readers who skim the

passage also attain low scores on the reading recall section of SmarterMeasure.

Gender: Independent sample t-tests were calculated to determine if there are statistically significant

differences between the means of gender and the constructs measured by SmarterMeasure. For scoring

and reporting purposes each of the constructs measured by SmarterMeasure are quantified on a 0 to 100

scale. This scale is considered the composite score for that construct.

Females were found to have statistically significant higher means on the construct of individual attributes.

Males were found to have statistically significant higher means on the constructs of reading rate and

technical knowledge. It should be noted that for many students a high reading rate could be interpreted

as a negative attribute since it may indicate that the student skimmed the passage.

Note: in the following tables the highest mean is underlined for ease of interpretation. Statistically

significant differences in means are indicated in a bold, red font.

Group Statistics

Gender N Mean Std. Deviation Significance

Individual Attributes Female 2455 80.286709 7.1671522 .000

Male 1004 77.687500 7.8983216

Reading Recall Female 2182 73.757269 17.9385997 .425

Male 893 75.440414 17.4033108



Reading Rate Female 2209 341.79 1052.887 .005

Male 904 418.53 1350.459

Typing Accuracy Female 1989 92.12 18.164 .606

Male 859 92.07 18.945

Typing Rate Female 1989 28.47 45.791 .370

Male 859 27.76 70.372

Technical Knowledge Female 2262 71.265964 11.8291354 .049

Male 968 73.305919 12.5636313

Technical Competency Female 2308 91.587361 12.5164405 .983

Male 984 92.292327 11.8864940

Life Factors Female 2437 79.8167 8.86383 .167

Male 1026 78.4792 9.28069



Ethnicity: Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was calculated to determine if there are statistically significant

differences between the means of the different ethnic groups and the constructs measured by

SmarterMeasure. Statistically significant differences in means were reported in seven of the eight

constructs based on ethnicity. The twenty-four American Indian test takers who were randomly selected

for this analysis were an exemplary group with the highest means in Individual Attributes, Reading Recall,

Typing Accuracy, Technical Knowledge and Life Factors. African-Americans reported the highest means

for Reading Rate. Caucasian/White reported the highest means for Technical Competency.

N Mean Std. Deviation Significance

Individual Attributes African-American 786 80.231399 7.4130506 .001

Alaskan Native 3 77.083333 10.4150004

American Indian 24 81.727917 5.7376446

Asian or Pacific Islander 90 78.287667 7.8047364

Caucasian / White 1970 79.618036 7.4263632

Latino / Hispanic 319 78.198621 7.4488922

Other race 110 78.627273 7.9724627

Total 3302 79.570678 7.4664322

Reading Recall African-American 679 67.840457 19.3317658 .000

Alaskan Native 2 80.000000 14.1421356

American Indian 24 82.916667 20.3190137


Caucasian / White 1788 77.154883 15.9479167

Latino / Hispanic 284 70.534613 18.5602854

Other race 98 72.578980 19.2917654

Total 2960 74.257770 17.7084109

Reading Rate African-American 693 487.10 1649.162 .040

Alaskan Native 2 197.00 76.368



American Indian 24 177.88 64.494


Caucasian / White 1803 319.00 926.656

Latino / Hispanic 289 330.50 972.860

Other race 99 243.29 313.707

Total 2995 356.61 1123.845

Typing Accuracy African-American 590 88.52 22.928 .000




Caucasian / White 1697 93.24 16.882

Latino / Hispanic 270 92.31 16.151

Other race 86 91.31 19.004

Total 2747 92.07 18.459

Typing Rate African-American 590 23.16 57.838 .148






Other race 86 24.93 12.738

Total 2747 28.27 55.314

Technical Knowledge African-American 708 69.090268 13.0954717 .000

Alaskan Native 3 69.793333 11.8328202

American Indian 23 75.113913 9.3820635


Caucasian / White 1876 72.910160 11.5094075



Latino / Hispanic 293 71.279932 11.9715347

Other race 98 71.657857 14.4300068

Total 3088 71.895308 12.1160702

Technical Competency African-American 723 87.429087 16.7775643 .000

Alaskan Native 3 83.333333 5.7735027

American Indian 23 92.077391 7.5379966


Caucasian / White 1911 93.589833 9.8703553

Latino / Hispanic 297 90.550135 12.6973165

Other race 103 92.254757 10.1515839

Total 3150 91.808584 12.3096544

Life Factors African-American 779 78.8468 9.48965 .000

Alaskan Native 3 70.3333 12.89703



Caucasian / White 1976 80.0059 8.61678

Latino / Hispanic 328 78.4736 8.53915

Other race 107 77.5670 9.79223

Total 3312 79.4362 8.95958



Number of Online Courses Taken: Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was calculated to determine the

impact that a person taking prior online courses has on their readiness. The results demonstrated that

experience matters with online learning. In each of the eight constructs measured, as persons took more

online courses their readiness measures improved. The differences in the means were statistically

significant in six of the eight groups. The greatest difference in means from students with no prior online

course experience and those who had taken five or more courses continued to be in the area of technical

knowledge. This indicates that with experience students can learn to use the technology required for

online courses.

Learners who had taken five or more prior online courses had statistically significant higher means for the

constructs of Individual Attributes, Typing Accuracy, Technical Knowledge, Technical Competency and

Life Factors. Those who had taken four prior courses had the highest means for Reading Recall.


Individual Attributes .00 1869 78.783606 7.6386534 .000

1.00 463 79.254276 7.0584733

2.00 336 79.472917 7.0566262

3.00 209 79.453636 7.5601345

4.00 171 80.515029 7.1522677

5.00 563 82.051901 6.7668558

Total 3611 79.538435 7.4402396

Reading Recall .00 1639 73.257041 18.2382965 .018

1.00 396 76.092778 16.8481110

2.00 300 74.148567 17.5516968

3.00 189 75.021905 17.4724067

4.00 160 75.642187 17.0797948

5.00 524 75.583073 17.1872582

Total 3208 74.293335 17.7611525

Reading Rate .00 1659 322.83 1098.302 .241

1.00 400 366.15 960.931



2.00 305 388.55 1243.840

3.00 192 464.90 1585.572

4.00 164 358.96 668.934

5.00 528 452.38 1356.806

Total 3248 365.62 1160.258

Typing Accuracy .00 1563 91.12 19.962 .002

1.00 364 93.14 15.655

2.00 284 91.96 19.594

3.00 171 92.01 18.671

4.00 134 93.39 15.371

5.00 457 95.17 12.366

Total 2973 92.22 18.222

Typing Rate .00 1563 25.95 52.703 .138

1.00 364 28.17 13.536

2.00 284 32.23 82.378

3.00 171 35.40 108.228

4.00 134 29.49 13.121

5.00 457 30.32 12.226

Total 2973 28.20 53.264

Technical Knowledge .00 1773 69.397682 12.3433971 .000

1.00 415 72.268675 11.2762827

2.00 321 72.694642 11.5473068

3.00 194 74.992680 11.4898232

4.00 159 74.385535 10.2427792

5.00 542 77.710590 10.0640944

Total 3404 71.934075 12.0562578

Technical Competency .00 1818 90.536122 14.0257477 .000



1.00 428 92.679276 10.9134219

2.00 324 92.218920 9.7376501

3.00 197 94.754772 9.2625212

4.00 162 92.551481 11.1723427

5.00 547 94.349068 8.8378789

Total 3476 91.889902 12.3161684

Life Factors .00 1925 79.1879 8.90074 .002

1.00 475 79.4112 9.50783

2.00 343 78.6569 9.12090

3.00 206 79.3900 9.10374

4.00 162 79.8210 8.81832

5.00 534 80.9076 8.64178

Total 3645 79.4585 8.99058



Age Range: Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was calculated to determine if differences exist between age

ranges. Significant differences did exist in four of the eight of the constructs measured. Generally

speaking, age does matter as demonstrated below. For constructs related to personal maturity, older

students had the highest means. For constructs related to technical matters, younger students had the

highest means. This was consistent with the prior three years’ findings. It should be noted that N=41 for

persons in the 60+ age range in the random sample.

Age Range

2012 Highest Mean 2011 Highest Mean 2010 Highest Mean 2009 Highest Mean

13-17 Learning Styles Typing Rate

18-22 Typing Rate Reading Rate Typing Accuracy

23-27 Typing Rate Learning Styles Reading Rate

Learning Styles Typing Rate Typing Accuracy

28-32 Reading Rate Technical Knowledge

Technical Knowledge

33-37 Technical Knowledge

Technical Knowledge

38-42 Reading Recall Technical Competency

43-47

48-52 Individual Attributes

53-59 Individual Attributes Life Factors

Reading Recall Reading Recall

60+ Typing Accuracy Individual Attributes Typing Accuracy Life Factors

Reading Recall Life Factors

Individual Attributes


Individual Attributes 18-22 1242 77.657238 7.5642158 .000

23-27 636 79.708679 7.3373974

28-32 471 80.281805 6.6056840

33-37 310 80.644452 6.9970478

38-42 273 81.389670 7.0374050



43-47 215 81.539721 6.6816373

48-52 165 81.945212 7.5640571

53-59 124 82.670081 7.2696364

60+ 40 82.573750 7.2143208

Total 3476 79.626853 7.4163221

Reading Recall 18-22 1103 72.316074 18.6412518 .001

23-27 536 74.779534 18.0112308

28-32 417 75.079664 16.6178939

33-37 293 75.169215 17.8778758

38-42 245 77.287714 16.8355454

43-47 189 75.560476 16.1251365

48-52 149 75.930537 18.6345571

53-59 116 76.277586 14.8325134

60+ 35 75.714857 13.6439893

Total 3083 74.345621 17.7782013

Reading Rate 18-22 1111 401.78 1291.619 .119

23-27 550 399.80 1227.745

28-32 422 450.11 1522.026

33-37 294 304.46 809.142

38-42 248 284.97 597.576

43-47 192 215.17 199.487

48-52 152 263.68 716.195

53-59 117 211.50 215.696

60+ 35 304.54 676.807

Total 3121 363.09 1140.358

Typing Accuracy 18-22 1079 92.50 17.594 .522

23-27 507 91.85 19.390



28-32 373 91.52 20.510

33-37 251 93.39 15.515

38-42 219 91.42 19.528

43-47 159 91.31 18.487

48-52 123 93.94 10.787

53-59 101 89.13 24.571

60+ 29 94.41 7.790

Total 2841 92.15 18.351

Typing Rate 18-22 1079 27.49 12.453 .174

23-27 507 34.46 109.256

28-32 373 25.40 12.398

33-37 251 27.00 12.477

38-42 219 25.70 13.225

43-47 159 32.69 112.460

48-52 123 23.15 12.476

53-59 101 23.04 11.965

60+ 29 28.52 11.195

Total 2841 28.23 54.420

Technical Knowledge 18-22 1197 70.018881 11.2363065 .000

23-27 584 74.213373 11.7163097

28-32 430 74.192163 11.3414873

33-37 304 73.908092 13.1101997

38-42 257 73.801946 12.1842675

43-47 190 71.976632 13.0028698

48-52 152 71.010197 12.5790680

53-59 119 71.560924 11.5309144

60+ 33 67.567273 11.9979895



Total 3266 72.169498 11.9305443

Technical Competency 18-22 1222 91.393093 13.2075593 .037

23-27 602 92.477093 13.0398015

28-32 437 92.687597 11.3991348

33-37 310 92.652419 11.7147805

38-42 261 92.694866 10.3424481

43-47 192 92.170260 10.8978884

48-52 155 89.942710 12.7008324

53-59 122 90.173197 11.7144902

60+ 33 88.283030 11.7227955

Total 3334 91.879406 12.4075921

Life Factors 18-22 1317 79.5135 9.06338 .554

23-27 644 79.4425 8.88951

28-32 463 78.9078 9.01898

33-37 308 78.7651 9.87996

38-42 267 79.3571 8.49199

43-47 207 79.0064 8.34445

48-52 156 79.8355 8.21998

53-59 115 80.7217 9.01027

60+ 36 80.3889 8.29553

Total 3513 79.3761 8.97154



Institution Type: Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was calculated to determine if differences exist between

students of different types of institutions. Significant differences did exist on six of the eight constructs

measured. Baccalaureate institutions had a statistically significant higher mean in the construct of

Reading Rate while Doctorate-granting Universities had the highest mean for Technical Competency.

Special Focus Institutions had statistically significant higher means in Individual Attributes, Reading

Recall, Technical Knowledge and Life Factors.

Since Special Focus Institutions had the highest mean in several categories, for the purpose of clarity the

institutions categorized as Special Focus Institutions were:

Air University Air War College Center for Adult Learning in Louisiana (CALL) Center For Advanced Legal Studies College Sector Committee for Adult Upgrading Int. Academy of Design and Technology PC ProSchools Pinellas Technical Education Centers Sanford Brown Institute Vatterott Educational Centers, Inc.

Comparisons were also made between for-profit and not-for-profit institutions. Statistically significant differences in means existed in six of the eight constructs measured. Public institutions had the highest mean for Life Factors. Private not-for-profits institutions, which historically have higher admissions standards, had the highest means for Individual Attributes, Reading Recall, Technical Knowledge and Technical Competency.


Individual Attributes Associates College 2519 79.775431 7.3496432 .000

Baccalaureate College 129 80.184884 7.1985393

Doctorate-granting University 2715 78.878217 6.2620138

Special Focus Institution 181 81.135635 7.1030915

Total 5544 79.389984 6.8471094

Reading Recall Associates College 2175 73.373140 18.3139670 .000






Total 4769 72.386672 18.7011382

Reading Rate Associates College 2203 384.77 1227.894 .034




Total 4821 391.42 1360.137

Typing Accuracy Associates College 2177 91.89 18.752 .119




Total 4319 92.08 17.641

Typing Rate Associates College 2177 28.17 61.792 .952




Total 4319 28.10 55.413

Technical Knowledge Associates College 2361 71.249111 12.0759585 .000




Total 4804 71.108880 11.8811268

Technical Competency Associates College 2427 91.651005 11.8257526 .000




Total 4932 91.767504 11.9698027

Life Factors Associates College 2671 79.9723 9.16011 .000






Total 6561 79.3597 8.86444


Individual Attributes Private for-profit 2805 78.937601 6.2590675 .000

Private not-for-profit 54 80.228519 7.9247778

Public 3710 80.071332 7.3658219

Total 6569 79.588514 6.9416202

Reading Recall Private for-profit 2368 70.223057 19.4960635 .000


Public 3327 74.431867 17.6783451

Total 5749 72.731435 18.5552268

Reading Rate Private for-profit 2385 431.14 1648.663 .109


Public 3366 356.48 1121.456

Total 5806 386.60 1360.393

Typing Accuracy Private for-profit 1965 91.78 16.768 .167


Public 3224 92.47 17.846

Total 5239 92.24 17.377

Typing Rate Private for-profit 1965 27.82 60.046 .909


Public 3224 27.98 45.223



Total 5239 27.95 51.106

Technical Knowledge Private for-profit 2289 70.347505 12.0229494 .000


Public 3433 72.023711 11.6016527

Total 5772 71.377464 11.7873450

Technical Competency Private for-profit 2316 90.784046 13.4659099 .000


Public 3546 92.486483 10.6348573

Total 5913 91.846709 11.8305389

Life Factors Private for-profit 3657 79.0020 8.63977 .000


Public 3902 80.2624 9.05048

Total 7615 79.6299 8.88362



ADDITIONAL ANALYSIS OF INDIVIDUAL ATTRIBUTES

The construct of individual attributes measured by the SmarterMeasure Learning Readiness Indicator

contains the following factors: (1) help seeking, (2) time management, (3) procrastination, (4) persistence,

(5) academic attributes and (6) locus of control. These factors are attributes of a person which can

impact the degree to which they are comfortable and confident taking an online course.

“Help Seeking” is the degree to which a person is willing to ask for help when needed. “Time

Management” is the degree to which a person can plan for the appropriate use of their time.

“Procrastination” is the degree to which a person completes tasks in a timely manner. “Persistence” is the

degree to which a person maintains activity with a task until completion. “Academic Attributes” are

indicative of a person’s prior academic success. “Locus of Control” is the degree to which a person feels

that they are in control of their outcomes. Each of these factors was measured on a composite score

ranging from 1 – 16 with 16 being a high degree of the attributes.

The bar charts below present a frequency report of the scores for each factor on the scale of 1 – 16 with

16 being a high degree of the desired measure of the attribute. These charts represent the frequencies of

the random sample of 2% of the total data set.

Help Seeking Time Management



Procrastination Persistence

Academic Attributes Locus of Control

Additional analysis was conducted to determine if significant differences existed between the

demographic groups and these individual attributes factors.



Gender: Using an independent samples t-test, significant differences were found with females having

higher means in the factors of academic attributes and time management. This finding was parallel from

the prior year.

Group Statistics

Gender N Mean Std. Deviation Significance

Academic Attributes Female 2455 13.85 1.931 .070

Male 1004 13.42 2.014

Help Seeking Female 2455 12.29 1.531 .058

Male 1004 11.75 1.599

Locus of Control Female 2455 11.03 2.493 .107

Male 1004 10.99 2.361

Persistence Female 2455 12.22 1.719 .762

Male 1004 12.05 1.768

Procrastination Female 2455 12.54 2.351 .266

Male 1004 12.11 2.319

Time Management Female 2455 14.51 1.694 .000

Male 1004 13.82 2.022



Ethnicity: Significant differences were found between the ethnic groups in four of the six individual

attribute factors.

African Americans reported the highest means in the categories of Persistence and Procrastination.

American Indians reported the highest means in Help Seeking and Time Management. Caucasian/White

reported the highest means in Locus of Control


Academic Attributes African-American 786 13.72 2.077 .605






Other race 110 13.42 2.203

Total 3302 13.72 1.966

Help Seeking African-American 786 12.25 1.569 .000






Other race 110 11.78 1.731

Total 3302 12.14 1.567

Locus of Control African-American 786 10.58 2.677 .000








Other race 110 10.88 2.587

Total 3302 11.01 2.466

Persistence African-American 786 12.55 1.783 .000






Other race 110 12.16 1.662

Total 3302 12.18 1.731

Procrastination African-American 786 12.75 2.364 .001






Other race 110 12.32 2.163

Total 3302 12.42 2.348

Time Management African-American 786 14.33 1.860 .022








Other race 110 14.05 1.871

Total 3302 14.33 1.810



Number of Prior Online Courses: Significant differences did exist depending on the number of prior

online courses that a person has taken in three of the six categories of individual attributes. In all of the

factors, the highest mean existed for persons who had taken four or more online courses. This indicates

that as a person’s experience with online courses increases, the degree to which their individual attributes

are a good match for distance learning also increases.


Academic Attributes .00 1869 13.66 1.963 .168

1.00 463 13.82 1.943

2.00 336 13.90 1.692

3.00 209 13.67 1.983

4.00 171 13.75 2.161

5.00 563 13.84 1.994

Total 3611 13.74 1.954

Help Seeking .00 1869 12.04 1.605 .000

1.00 463 12.03 1.547

2.00 336 12.15 1.496

3.00 209 12.03 1.553

4.00 171 12.45 1.423

5.00 563 12.45 1.473

Total 3611 12.13 1.564

Locus of Control .00 1869 11.08 2.269 .512

1.00 463 10.95 2.401

2.00 336 11.17 2.293

3.00 209 10.79 2.690

4.00 171 10.98 2.782

5.00 563 11.03 2.893

Total 3611 11.04 2.446



Persistence .00 1869 12.16 1.697 .007

1.00 463 12.08 1.768

2.00 336 12.02 1.680

3.00 209 12.08 1.829

4.00 171 12.07 1.679

5.00 563 12.41 1.755

Total 3611 12.17 1.723

Procrastination .00 1869 12.29 2.395 .000

1.00 463 12.26 2.263

2.00 336 12.32 2.302

3.00 209 12.40 2.388

4.00 171 12.61 2.412

5.00 563 12.88 2.198

Total 3611 12.41 2.349

Time Management .00 1869 14.08 1.966 .000

1.00 463 14.40 1.744

2.00 336 14.44 1.678

3.00 209 14.42 1.705

4.00 171 14.63 1.534

5.00 563 14.82 1.390

Total 3611 14.31 1.818





Age Range: Significant differences did exist between the age categories on the factors of individual

attributes. In this analysis, it is clear that one’s individual attributes in relation to online learning do

improve with age. It should be noted that N=41 for the age range of 60+.

Age Range 2009 Highest Mean 2010 Highest Mean 2011 Highest Mean 2012 Highest Mean

13-17

18-22

23-27 Academic Attributes

28-32

33-37

38-42

43-47 Academic Attributes Help Seeking

48-52 Help Seeking Procrastination Time Management Locus of Control

53-59 Academic Attributes Time Management

Persistence Time Management

60+ Persistence Procrastination Locus of Control

Help Seeking Time Management Procrastination Persistence

Academic Attributes Locus of Control Persistence Procrastination


Academic Attributes 18-22 1242 13.90 1.811 .025

23-27 636 13.71 1.955

28-32 471 13.57 1.979

33-37 310 13.56 2.195

38-42 273 13.71 1.976

43-47 215 13.56 2.128

48-52 165 13.67 2.069

53-59 124 13.65 2.122

60+ 40 13.95 2.012

Total 3476 13.74 1.959



Help Seeking 18-22 1242 11.72 1.639 .000

23-27 636 12.22 1.454

28-32 471 12.40 1.418

33-37 310 12.48 1.489

38-42 273 12.51 1.364

43-47 215 12.58 1.461

48-52 165 12.37 1.582

53-59 124 12.46 1.434

60+ 40 12.48 1.301

Total 3476 12.15 1.554

Locus of Control 18-22 1242 10.90 2.049 .038

23-27 636 11.08 2.431

28-32 471 11.01 2.541

33-37 310 10.84 2.742

38-42 273 11.37 2.622

43-47 215 11.24 2.777

48-52 165 11.25 2.923

53-59 124 11.31 3.234

60+ 40 11.45 2.908

Total 3476 11.04 2.456

Persistence 18-22 1242 12.02 1.659 .000

23-27 636 12.04 1.788

28-32 471 12.18 1.730

33-37 310 12.18 1.724

38-42 273 12.32 1.675

43-47 215 12.46 1.611

48-52 165 12.60 1.821



53-59 124 12.74 1.852

60+ 40 12.48 1.739

Total 3476 12.17 1.723

Procrastination 18-22 1242 12.02 2.468 .000

23-27 636 12.56 2.315

28-32 471 12.55 2.209

33-37 310 12.61 2.232

38-42 273 12.73 2.226

43-47 215 12.79 2.105

48-52 165 12.73 2.296

53-59 124 12.83 2.408

60+ 40 13.23 2.118

Total 3476 12.42 2.350

Time Management 18-22 1242 13.97 1.930 .000

23-27 636 14.47 1.724

28-32 471 14.46 1.675

33-37 310 14.59 1.702

38-42 273 14.61 1.653

43-47 215 14.53 1.599

48-52 165 14.81 1.596

53-59 124 14.84 1.679

60+ 40 14.60 1.692

Total 3476 14.35 1.795





Institution Type: Significant differences did exist between the types of institutions and the factors of

individual attributes on all six constructs measured. Baccalaureate colleges had statistically significant

higher means on the category of persistence. Special Focus Institutions had the highest means for

Academic Attributes, Locus of Control and Procrastination. Doctorate-granting Universities rated the

highest in Help Seeking and Time Management.

Comparisons were made between profit and not-for-profit institutions. Statistically significant differences

in means did exist in each of the Individual Attributes measured between the institution types. Private for-

profit institutions had the highest mean for Time Management. Public institutions had the highest mean

for Procrastination. Private not-for-profit institutions, which historically are more selective in admissions,

had the highest means for Academic Attributes, Help Seeking, Locus of Control and Persistence.


Academic Attributes Associates College 2519 13.96 1.772 .000




Total 5544 13.80 1.865

Help Seeking Associates College 2519 12.18 1.522 .000




Total 5544 12.65 1.669

Locus of Control Associates College 2519 11.35 2.047 .000




Total 5544 11.07 2.249

Persistence Associates College 2519 12.18 1.700 .000






Total 5544 11.69 2.008

Procrastination Associates College 2519 12.54 2.357 .000




Total 5544 12.06 2.282

Time Management Associates College 2519 14.37 1.799 .000




Total 5544 14.58 1.683


Academic Attributes Private for-profit 2805 13.62 1.927 .000


Public 3710 14.03 1.739

Total 6569 13.86 1.834

Help Seeking Private for-profit 2805 13.13 1.666 .000


Public 3710 12.17 1.538

Total 6569 12.58 1.665



Locus of Control Private for-profit 2805 10.72 2.408 .000


Public 3710 11.41 2.011

Total 6569 11.12 2.216

Persistence Private for-profit 2805 11.22 2.158 .000


Public 3710 12.16 1.695

Total 6569 11.76 1.964

Procrastination Private for-profit 2805 11.62 2.103 .000


Public 3710 12.63 2.374

Total 6569 12.20 2.317

Time Management Private for-profit 2805 14.76 1.552 .000


Public 3710 14.46 1.768

Total 6569 14.59 1.685



APPENDIX ONE

324 Schools with students represented in the 2012 analysis.

Adams State College Air University Air War College

Alamo - Northwest Vista College Alamo - Palo Alto College Alamo - San Antonio College

Alamo - St. Philip's College Albany Technical College Algonquin College

Altamaha Technical College Alvin Community College Amarillo College

Angelina College Anne Arundel Community College Anoka-Ramsey Community College

Anthem College Online Apollo Group Argosy University

Arizona State University Arkansas State University Ashford University

Athens State University Athens Technical College Atlanta Technical College

Augusta Technical College Austin Community College District Bainbridge College

Baton Rouge Community

College

Bay College Beckfield College

Blackhawk Technical College Blinn College Brazosport College

Briarcliffe College Brookdale Community College

Teaching and Learning

Brookhaven College

Broward College Brown College Buena Vista University

California Baptist University California State University,

Fullerton

Capella University

Capital Area Online Learning

Association

Cedar Valley College Center for Adult Learning in Louisiana

(CALL)

Center For Advanced Legal

Studies

Central Georgia Technical College Central New Mexico Community

College

Century Community and

Technical College

Chaminade University of Honolulu Chattahoochee Technical College

Chattanooga State Community

College

Chesapeake College Chicago State University

Chippewa Valley Technical

College

Cincinnati State Technical and

Community College

Cisco College

Clarendon College Clark College Clark State Community College

Coahoma Community College Cochise County Community

College District

College of DuPage

College of Southern Maryland College of the Mainland College of Western Idaho



College Sector Committee for

Adult Upgrading

Collin County Community College Collins College

Colorado State University -

Global Campus

Colorado Technical University - KC Columbus State Community College

Columbus State University Columbus Technical College Conestoga Valley School District

Copiah-Lincoln Community

College

Creighton University Cuyahoga Community College

Dallas Christian College Dallas TeleCollege Online DanEl Christian College

Darton College Dave Ross Davenport University

Del Mar College Delta College East Central Community College

East Mississippi Community

College

Eastern Lancaster County School

District

Eastern Wyoming College

Eastfield College ECPI University Edison State College

Edison State College -

Cornerstone

El Centro College El Paso Community College

Empire State College Fanshawe College Ferris State University

Florida A & M University Florida State College at

Jacksonville-Open Campus

Front Range Community College

Gadsden State Community

College

Galen College of Nursing Galveston College

Gaston College Gateway Community College Gateway Technical College

Georgia Northwestern Technical

College

Georgia Piedmont Technical

College

Georgia Virtual Technical Connection

Germanna Community College Gwinnett Technical College Hardin-Simmons University

Harford Community College Hill College Hillsborough Community College

Hinds Community College Holmes Community College Horry-Georgetown Technical College

Houston Community College

System

Howard College Hudson County Community College

Indian River State College Int. Academy of Design and Tech -

Chicago

Int. Academy of Design and Tech -

Detroit

Int. Academy of Design and

Tech - Las Vegas


Nashville


Online


Tech - Orlando


Sacramento


San Antonio




Tech - Seattle


Tampa

International Distance Ed Certification

Center

Itawamba Community College Ivy Tech Community College J. Sargeant Reynolds Community

College

Jackson Community College Jackson State University Jefferson College

John Wiley & Sons Jones County Junior College Kaskaskia College

Kellogg Community College Kennesaw State University Kilgore College

Kilian Community College Kodiak College Lake Michigan College

Lanier Technical College Laredo Community College Le Cordon Bleu College of Culinary

Arts Scottsdale

Lee College Lehigh Carbon Community College Lone Star College System

Lubbock Christian University Madison College Manchester Community College

McLennan Community College Mercer County Community College Meridian Community College

Mesa Community College Metropolitan Community College-

Kansas City

Miami Dade College

Mid Michigan Community

College

Mid-Plains Community College Middle Georgia Technical College

Middlesex Community College Midland College Midlands Technical College

Milwaukee Community Cyber

School

Minneapolis Community and

Technical College

Mississippi Gulf Coast Community

College

Mississippi State University Mississippi Virtual and Community

Colleges

Missouri College

Montcalm Community College Moultrie Technical College Mountain View College

National Park Community

College

National University College Navarro College

Nazarene Bible College Nebraska Methodist College New River Community and Technical

College

North Arkansas College North Central Michigan College North Central Texas College

North Georgia Technical College North Lake College North Park University

Northeast Mississippi

Community College

Northeast Texas Community

College

Northern Essex Community College

Northern Virginia Community

College

Northern Wyoming Community

College District

Northwest Mississippi Community

College

Oaks Christian Online School Oconee Fall Line Technical College Odessa College



Ogeechee Technical College Ohio University Okefenokee Technical College

Olympic College Ottawa University Ouachita Technical College

Owens Community College PA Learners Online Pacific College of Oriental Medicine

Panola College Paris Junior College Paul D. Camp Community College

PC ProSchools Pearl River Community College Penn State World Campus

Pfeiffer University Phoenix College Piedmont Community College

Pierce College eLearning Pinellas Technical Education

Centers

Polk State College

Prince George's Community

College

Rasmussen College Red River College

Rhodes State College Richland College San Jacinto College

Sanford Brown College - Atlanta Sanford Brown College - Cleveland Sanford Brown College - Dearborn

Sanford Brown College - Fenton Sanford Brown College - Grand

Rapids

Sanford Brown College - Hillside

Sanford Brown College -

Houston

Sanford Brown College - Phoenix Sanford Brown College - Saint Peters

Sanford Brown College - San

Antonio

Sanford Brown College - Skokie Sanford Brown College - Tinley Park

Sanford Brown College - Vienna Sanford Brown Institute -

Collinsville

Sanford Brown Institute - Dallas

Sanford Brown Institute - Ft.

Lauderdale

Sanford Brown Institute - Iselin Sanford Brown Institute - Jacksonville

Sanford Brown Institute -

Milwaukee

Sanford Brown Institute - Northloop Sanford Brown Institute - Pittsburgh

Sanford Brown Institute - Tampa Sanford Brown Institute - Trevose Sanford Brown Institute - Wilkens

Township

Savannah Technical College Scottsdale Community College SmarterMeasure Public Account

South Arkansas Community

College

South Central College South Florida State College

South Georgia Technical College South Plains College South Texas College

Southeast Arkansas College Southeastern Technical College Southern Crescent Technical College

Southern Nazarene University Southern University at New

Orleans

Southside Virginia Community

College

Southwest Georgia Technical Southwest Mississippi Community Southwestern College



College College

Spartan College of Aeronautics

and Technology

Spokane Community College St. Charles Community College

St. Louis Community College State College of Florida, Manatee-

Sarasota

Stephen F. Austin State University

Student Opportunity Center Tallahassee Community College Tarrant County College

Temple College Texarkana College Texas A & M - Commerce

Texas A&M University -

Central Texas

Texas State Technical College

Harlingen


Marshall


West Texas

Texas Woman's University The Community College of Baltimore

County

The Refrigeration School The Univ. of AL, College of

Continuing Studies

The University of Texas at El Paso

Three Rivers Community College Tri-County Technical College Trinity Valley Community College

Truckee Meadows Community

College

Tyler Junior College University of Cincinnati - Clermont

College

University of Colorado -

Colorado Springs

University of Nebraska at Kearney

eCampus

University of North Texas at Dallas

University of Northern Colorado University of Texas of the Permian

Basin

University of Washington

University of Wisconsin -

Extension

University System of Georgia

Board of Regents

Valdosta State University

Vatterott Educational Centers,

Inc.

Vernon College Virginia College

Volunteer State Community

College

Washtenaw Community College Wayland Baptist University

Wayne Community College Weatherford College West Georgia Technical College

Western New Mexico University Western Texas College Western Wyoming Community

College

Wharton County Junior College Whatcom Community College Wiregrass Georgia Technical College

Wisconsin Indianhead Technical

College

York Technical College Yorktown University

Total



APPENDIX TWO

About SmarterServices

SmarterServices is the industry leader in measuring online learner readiness. The clients of

SmarterServices benefit from deep internal expertise on distance education as well as the insights

gathered through a decade of service to 400+ educational institutions. The company provides

services for measuring online student readiness and satisfaction as well as databases of online

faculty and testing proctors.

Documents

2011 Student Readiness Report - USIAccording to Sloan-C (Going the Distance: Online Education in the United States, 2011) over 6.1 million students were taking at least one online