How Undergraduates Learn Computer Skills: Results of a Survey and Focus Group.

Abstract

Core computer competency skills have become requirements for both higher education and private industry. To meet with the demands for computer-literate students, many colleges and universities have implemented computer competency entrance exams, exit exams and required computer classes. Some colleges have made ownership of name-brand desktop or laptop computers a requirement for entrance, and others have even distributed computers to each of their students (Young 1997). Also hungry for computer-literate college students are corporate recruiters, who have reported that core computer competency skills are very important to the employability of a recent college graduate (Davis 1997). While there have been numerous articles defining what it means to be computer literate, what constitutes a core set of computer competency skills, and what colleges have done to change their curriculum, there has been little or no research that attempts to identify how students actually learn these skills and which method best suits their learning style. A survey of the undergraduates in Cornell University's College of Agriculture and Life Sciences was conducted in the fall of 1998. As part of a larger review of undergraduate curricula, a questionnaire was sent to all 3,084 students. The questionnaire included a section on Computer Competency Skills and asked students to rate the effectiveness of various methods for learning computer skills. 1,176 questionnaires were returned, and although the return rate was not ideal (38%), random telephone surveys to non-respondents did not reveal a bias between respondents and nonrespondents. This article reports on the quantitative findings from this survey and on the qualitative findings from a prior focus group of undergraduates on computer literacy. Results of the Survey We asked undergraduates to rate the effectiveness of eight methods for learning computer literacy skills (credit classes, non-credit workshops, drop-in clinics, faculty support, peer-support, online help, printed documentation, and trial and error). Responses were scored so that methods could be compared with each other. According to Figure 1, Trial and Error, Credit Classes and Peer Support were clearly ranked as being more effective than Faculty Support, Online Help, Printed Documentation, Non-Credit Workshops or Drop-In Clinics. [Figure 1 ILLUSTRATION OMITTED] We performed a Chi-square test to see if there were any differences that could be attributed to the student's year at college. There were no differences based on student year with the exception of Credit Classes in which upperlevel students consider credit classes more effective than lower-level students. In our college there are several open microcomputer labs designed specifically for drop-in use by students. We were surprised to see that Drop-In Clinics ranked last in our analysis, so we cross-tabulated some response variables to try to find out why. Several of the microcomputing labs are open from 8am to midnight, with limited daytime hours on weekends. Despite the fact that the majority of respondents (76%) claimed that the lab hours were adequate for their needs, this same group did not feel that these labs were an effective method for learning their computer skills. Secondly, the microcomputing labs are primarily staffed by trained students, not full-time staff members. We were interested in finding out if the lack of trained support was responsible for the low effectiveness of the labs. We found out, however, that even students who felt they received adequate help in the labs agreed that the labs were not an effective method for learning their computer skills. On March 26th 1998, we conducted a focus group with ten student leaders from our college. The purpose of the focus group was to obtain student feedback, perceptions and ideas about computer competencies and support. …