Online courses in higher education have a reputation for having a lower course completion or retention rate than face-to-face courses. Much of this reputation is based upon anecdotal evidence, is outdated, or is on a small scale, such as a comparison of individual courses or programs of instruction. A causal-comparative analysis was conducted among 11 large, high research public universities. The universities were compared to each other to determine if differences existed between online and face-to-face course completion; undergraduate and graduation online course completion was analyzed for differences as well. The findings suggested the magnitude of the differences between online and face-to-face completions rates was small or negligible. The area which showed a higher magnitude of difference was in the comparison between undergraduate and graduate online course completion; the practical significance could be worth considering for educational purposes.

This study focuses on the use of American Invention Kits from the Smithsonian Institute in conjunction with a 3D printer. In conjunction with a large dataset from a study funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF), this innovative research focuses on the effect the digital fabrication curriculum unit has on gifted and talented students' knowledge and affinity toward the fields of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). Students from two rural middle schools in north-central Texas (N = 190) took part in this quantitative study; the students were divided among four subgroups: gifted-contrast (n = 12), gifted-treatment (n = 8), nongifted-contrast (n = 76), and nongifted-treatment (n = 94). The surveys utilized include the STEM Semantics Survey, TIMSS-Limited, and a knowledge assessment for the specific curriculum unit focused on the solenoid. The STEM Semantics Survey is divided into five subsets. Thirty-two separate one-way repeated measures ANOVAs were performed across the surveys and subgroups. Statistically significant results were found on four comparisons. This research holds implications in the areas of advocating for gifted education, collecting field data, utilizing large datasets, and understanding rural schools.