Language Learning Outcomes in on Ground Vs. Online Settings: Comparison and Correlation

ABSTRACT

While the effectiveness of online instruction has been well established, there remains a limited understanding of the correlation between language skills and performance across various instructional sections. This study investigates the language proficiency outcomes of college students in online and on-ground language instruction, focusing on four essential language skills: Reading, Writing, Listening, and Speaking. Data were collected from students enrolled in third-semester language courses in French, German, Italian, and Spanish during the Spring semesters of 2019 and 2021 with on-ground and online instruction respectively in a public university in the United States. Descriptive statistics, the Kruskal-Wallis test, and pairwise correlation analysis were used to analyze the students’ performance in both modalities. The results indicate that students generally outperformed in the online modality, demonstrating a significantly higher positive correlation range compared to on-ground instruction. This finding suggests that multi-modality language instruction has the potential to foster more integrated and cohesive language proficiency development. The implications firstly show the positive correlation range in the online modality indicates that college instructors may be more capable of implementing effective online teaching methods due to various reasons. Secondly, college students’ potential for self-directed learning in the online setting may contribute to their enhanced outcomes. However, the study also reveals challenges for less taught languages, such as the need for additional support in terms of resource curation and networking opportunities for instructors.

Acknowledgment

The authors express their sincere gratitude to Dr. Jesse Gleason and Dr. Resha Cardon for their invaluable contributions through insightful intellectual discussions during the initial phases of manuscript drafting. Their heartfelt appreciation extends to Dr. Don Miller for his constructive feedback and consistent guidance throughout the study. The authors also thank Dr. Nick Gossett and Dr. Victor Santos from Avant Assessment for their generous support and sharing of expertise, which significantly enriched this project.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Supplemental data

Supplemental data for this article can be accessed online at https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2024.2366594.