Here is my analysis of the meta activities for my experimental intro course this semester. You can compare this with last semester’s results. The results remain depressing.
* Nearly 60% failed to participate (59% submitted 0-1 of 8 assignments; indeed, 43% submitted none). This is roughly the same as during the Fall semester
* About a fifth participated moderately (21% submitted 2-5/8 times). This is a reduction relative to the Fall semester.
* Only 15% participated regularly (6-7/8 times). This is an increase.
Of the forty per cent who participated in the abstract meta activities, somewhat fewer participated moderately, while somewhat more participated regularly.
* Nearly 60% failed to participate (58% submitted 0-3 of 14 quizzes). This in an increase relative to the Fall semester.
* About 26% participated moderately (submitting 4-9/14 quizzes). This is a reduction.
* Only 14% participated regularly (11+/14 quizzes). This is another reduction.
Many more students chose not to do the on-line quizzes this term, making the participation comparable to that of the abstract metas.
To investigate why so few participated during the Spring semester I surveyed those who didn’t. The response rate was about 50%. (Some students gave more than one reason.)
4 responses: I didn’t do them because they weren’t required.
3 responses: I didn’t have enough time to do them, given my workload.
3 responses: I felt I could learn the material better by studying in other ways.
3 responses: The metas were difficult/I didn’t understand how to do them.
2 responses: The interactive quizzes were confusing since they contained material not used in the course and it was hard to identify that material.
< The complete responses are available here.>