Distance Education - Lit Review Major Jeffrey J. Scott This paper was completed and submitted in partial fulfillment of the Master Teacher Program, a two-year faculty professional development program conducted by the Center for Teaching Excellence, United States Military Academy, West Point, NY, 2012. Background st

As we push deeper into the 21 century, new technologies continue to be developed that allow for easier public access to distance education. Today’s increasingly sophisticated technological discoveries allow for distance education programs to expand at an ever-increasing rate (Weinstein, 1997). Some would argue that these new technological improvements, coupled with advancements in the school’s understanding, curriculum design, and experience with distance education, make distance education’s effectiveness equal to or better than the traditional face-to-face classroom (Sonner, 1999). On the contrary, there are others that believe that no matter how sophisticated the distance education program becomes, that there will never be a replacement for the interaction that one receives from teachers and fellow students alike in a tradition brick and mortar classroom setting (Abrahamson, 1998). Effectiveness is often measured by student performance, that is, how well the students learn and apply the course material. Student performance is most commonly measured by testing. Also, effectiveness must be considered in terms of the students’ perceptions and their satisfaction with the program.

Distance education is not a new development. According to Sherry (1995), it has existed for more than a century and has its beginnings in European correspondence courses. It is a field of education that allows for students to participate in classes while never setting foot inside of a classroom. Today, distance education is a broad term that refers to several styles of education. Under the umbrella of distance education there are two distinct groups, synchronous and asynchronous education. Synchronous education refers to a mode of delivery that allows all class participants to be present simultaneously through a communications network. Common types of synchronous deliveries are the telephone, web conferencing, and video conferencing. Asynchronous distance education refers to a mode of delivery that does not allow for the class participants to communicate in real time, but which allows for greater

1

individual flexibility regarding when the course content is accessed. Some modes of asynchronous delivery tend to be unsophisticated such as standard mail, communications through fax, and video and audio delivery via CD, DVD, or VHS. More advanced asynchronous methods of delivery include email and internet based message boards.

Distance education is appealing to schools for myriad reasons, to include the fact that it can be a lucrative investment. Schools can attract more business because it allows for more students to take classes. Also, it allows for students from outside of the geographic footprint to enroll in classes that they otherwise would not feasibly be able to do. Distance education entails much less financial overhead and infrastructure from the school. It has become so successful that a tremendous variety of schools strictly offer classes through distance education.

Distance education also offers appealing opportunities for the student. Flexibility of schedule, especially when considering asynchronous distance education, is one of the most desirable characteristics of this type of education. It allows for students to access class when and where it is most appropriate for them, and therefore, it offers the opportunity to balance life’s demands of family, work, and the countless other competing requirements. Other desirable characteristics for the student include time and financial savings from the commute to class, the potential increase of class seats, and a general opportunity for people to get an education that otherwise maybe would not.

Educators believe there are several shortfalls that prevent it from being as successful as classes delivered in the traditional classroom. They believe that students learn best through the direct face-toface interaction provided by the traditional classroom. Studies have shown that students have more enjoyment and prefer the individualized instructor feedback provided in a traditional school (Abrahamson, 1998). Also, students must have access to certain technologies, oftentimes that includes the internet and a personal computer, and those technologies can make distance education expensive. Students must also have some level of technological skills to properly participate in a today’s distance education classes that depend on continued advancements in technology. Also, there is a concern that some proprietary

2

schools are merely just “diploma mills”, more concerned with their bottom line than with the quality of the institution’s education. Appropriate accreditation and the standards of certain distance education programs have come into question in the past.

Review of Literature There is a real argument between academics regarding the effectiveness of distance education, and I have identified 10 peer-reviewed journal articles for this review. Five articles support the argument that distance education is as effective as the traditional classroom education, and five support the argument that the traditional classroom is the superior form of education. I will identify the main points of each citation and will keep that organized by argument.

Articles that support the effectiveness of the traditional classroom The articles titled “Distance Learning in an Accounting Principles Course- Student Satisfaction and Perceptions of Efficacy” (Vamosi, Pierce, and Slotkin, 2004), “The Impact of Online Teaching on Faculty Load: Computing the Ideal Class Size for Online Courses” (Tomei, 2006), “Delivering Graduate Marketing Education: An Analysis of Face-to-face versus Distance Education” (Ponzurick, France, and Logar, 2000), “On-Line Education in a Management Science Course- Effectiveness and Performance Factors” (Dellana, Collins, and West, 2000), and “Student Perceptions of Online Versus On Campus Instruction” (Beard and Harper, 2004) support the effectiveness of the traditional classroom.

These five articles all have similar topics. The general topic is the effectiveness of various distance education programs versus the typical brick and mortar classroom. Three articles based their findings on student perceptions and class size, respectively. Beard et. al. (2004) focus on student perceptions of the two types of education before and after course completion, Vamosi et. al. (2004) focus on student perceptions of efficacy comparing the two education styles, and Tomei (2006) focuses on class size when comparing the effectiveness.

3

The research hypotheses try to determine: 1. Is the effectiveness of distance education equivalent to that of traditional education? 2. What is the relative efficacy of a distance learning delivery? 3. What is the ideal class size in distance education? All five articles ask, “is distance education as effective as the traditional classroom?”

The samples were all taken from students that make up the respective distance education and traditional classes. The sample sizes are not large in some cases, ranging from only 22 students to 221 students, and in one study the number of participants is not even provided.

Data collection were similar in all five studies. Data were collected from the students within the class and taken from their test scores and from surveys. Surveys were at a minimum conducted at the conclusion of the semester and in most instances were conducted in the beginning, as well. In the research conducted by Ponzurick et. al. (2000) surveys were administered and completed at the end of each class. In Tomei’s (2006) research, not all students participated in the surveys for unidentified reasons. The study conducted by Vamosi et. al. (2004) was set up with two populations of students both taking the same class. One population initially took the class via the classroom and then rotated to a classroom/distance education setting, and then finally into a strictly distance education delivery. The second population did the same thing, but in reverse order. Tomei (2006) measured the number of hours that the teacher spent advising his students, both in the traditional classroom compared to his distance education group.

Vamosi et. al. (2004) classified his students’ attitudes and perceptions with five categories and asked the students eight questions based on their attitudes and perceptions. Tomei (2006) developed several charts that highlighted the amount of time versus class size that the teacher dedicated to his students. Beard et. al. (2004) designed a survey to measure students’ perception with a scale of five categories and with ten questions and this study also included open-ended questions. Ponzurick et. al (2000) utilized several surveys to capture students’ perceptions of their face-to-face class as compared to their distance education class. Dellana et. al. (2000) measured student performance through GPA comparison between

4

the two populations, one enrolled in the traditional classroom and the second enrolled in distance education.

Survey responses from Dellana et. al. (2000), Ponzurick et. al. (2000), and Vamosi et. al (2004) were measured on a 7-point Likert-type scale to allow for statistical comparison between each question. Student attendance was also category that was measured for statistical comparison.

Test scores were analyzed and statistically compared for students taking the distance education course versus students taking the same course in the traditional classroom setting. Scores were also analyzed for those students that began the semester in one course delivery and that switched to the other course delivery to see if there was statistical difference. Tomei (2006) statistically compared teacher hours dedicated to advising students between the two delivery styles.

The survey findings all demonstrated a student shared preference to traditional classroom study over distance education; however there was no significant difference between the grades between the two delivery styles. Vamosi et. al. (2004) found the data revealed that student satisfaction with the distant learning portion of the course was significantly lower than that regarding the traditional classroom for many of the course attributes to include (a) the interest level associated with course content, (b) the ease of learning the course material, and (c) the effectiveness in learning the course material. In all three instances, the distance learning component received significantly lower satisfaction ratings than did its counterpart. Tomei (2006) discovered that, overall, approximately 14% more hours were required to teach the same number of students online for distance learning than in the traditional classroom. Beard et. al. (2004) discovered that there were concerns from the distance education students concerning hardware and software, and that they would take another similar course, but prefer the interaction with the instructor that the traditional classroom offers. Ponzurick et. al (2000) found that only 10 of 138 said they preferred distance learning. Forty-three responded that they like the student/teacher interaction offered in a traditional classroom.

5

Collectively the five studies suggest student preference towards the traditional classroom. The biggest factor in common with these five articles is the student preference for the student/teacher interaction that is offered in the traditional classroom. It is important to note that the studies found no significant difference between student grades with these two delivery styles.

Articles that support the argument that distance education is as effective as classroom education The articles titled “Success in the Capstone Business Course- Assessing the Effectiveness of Distance Learning” (Sonner, 1999), “Comparing the Success of Students Enrolled in Distance Education Courses vs. Face–to–Face Classrooms” (Swan and Jackman, 2000), “On-line Instruction: Are the Outcomes the Same?” (Warren and Holloman Jr., 2005), “Making a Choice: The Perceptions and Attitudes of Online Graduate Students” (Braun, 2008), and “Student Ratings of Instruction in Distance Learning and On-Campus Classes” (Spooner, Jordan, Algozzine, Spooner, 1999) support the argument that distance education is as effective as classroom education.

The topics are similar for these five articles. They each compare the effectiveness of distance education versus the traditional face-to-face classroom. Each study wants to ascertain if there are student achievement and perception differences between the two types of education. In all, there are two general hypotheses. 1. Are students achieving the same grades, based on GPA, when comparing those taking the same class in the traditional classroom to those taking it through distance education? 2. Do students rate their experience with distance learning as comparable to traditional classroom learning?

The samples were taken from the students enrolled in the classes in the traditional classroom and those taking the same classes through distance education. Two studies utilized college undergraduates to include Sonner (1999) using 85 students and Braun (2008) using 90 students. Swan et. al. (2000) has a sample of 623 secondary education students and Warren et. al. (2005) and Spooner et. al. (1999) utilized 52 and 123 graduate students, respectively.

6

With the exception of Braun (2008), data were collected from student assignments to include quizzes and exams and statistically analyzed. All studies conducted surveys in order to measure student perception and the close-ended survey questions were statistically analyzed. Sonner (1999) studied both samples through a series of business courses and measured mean GPAs between both samples at the completion of their final business course, the capstone class. Warren et. al. (2005) had the students, to include the distance education and traditional classroom populations, make a portfolio that consisted of their professional webpage design, a professional mission statement that included their goals, interviews, a PowerPoint presentation, a research paper, article critiques, and midterm and final examinations. The portfolios were assessed and analyzed by three outside evaluations for their overall quality.

Swan et. al. (2000) compared mean GPA of the two samples in order to ensure that one historically did not receive better grades prior to the introduction of distance education. Warren et. al. (2005) pre-assessed the students at the beginning of the course and post-assessed at the end of the course in a self evaluation that examined their level of expertise in the course's competencies and objectives. This self-evaluation was conducted using a 7-point Likert-type scale. Braun (2008) also surveyed students utilizing a 7-point Likert-type scale. His survey contained 26 questions, however, the last two questions were open-ended responses. Spooner et. al. (1999) chose to use a 5-point Likert-type scale to measure student responses.

Sonner (1999) found that students who had earned credit in at least one distance learning class had a significantly higher average in the capstone class than those students who only took traditional classes. The research identified significant positive correlation between the number of distance learning courses the students had completed and their final class average.

Research by Swan et. al. (2000) demonstrated that instruction by distance education resulted in no differences in GPA for students when compared to students in the traditional classroom. The data generated and analyzed by Warren et. al. (2005) indicated that there was no significant difference between the face-to-face portion and the distance education portion. Also, results of the course

7

evaluations administered by the university reveal no significant difference in student satisfaction between the two portions. Braun (2008) found that students preferred distance education. They enjoyed the flexibility that it provided because it allowed them to balance school, career, and caring for their families. The students believed they benefited from the distance education courses and that they would recommend the style and take similar classes again. Spooner et. al. (1999) found that no statistical difference were evident in student overall ratings of the two delivery styles. Student perceptions of the classes were statistically similar, and their ratings of the instruction and the communications were equivalent.

In conclusion, there was no evidence that traditional face-to-face instruction was more effective than distance education. All of the studies demonstrated that the student GPAs were either equal to or higher in the distance education courses when compared to their traditional classroom counterparts. Also, student perception reflected satisfaction levels equal to or above that of the traditional classroom.

The comparison of both sets of articles All articles focus their research on comparing student achievement, measured by student GPAs, and student perceptions between distance education and the traditional classroom. These findings support the notion that there is an argument between scholars regarding the effectiveness of distance education.

Critique of Research There are several similar strengths within both sets of articles; those that promote the effectiveness of the traditional classroom, and those that promote the effectiveness of distance education. I believe that it is better to study one sample population that attends courses, through both the traditional and distance formats, and compare how they performed, versus, using two distinct samples that attend courses in one format as opposed to the other. I believe that this methodology, called dual delivery in some studies, provides the researcher with more consistent findings. Vamosi et. al. (2004), Beard et. al. (2004), Ponzurick et. al. (2000), and Warren et. al. (2005) all chose to incorporate this methodology in their studies. Spooner et. al. (1999), Sonner (1999), Ponzurick et. al. (2000) also chose to study a sample of

8

students that attended classes utilizing both formats, over multiple semesters, to demonstrate a relationship between performance, within the same sample, with regard to each respective mode of delivery.

I believe that sample size can be a good determinant in recognizing the breadth of a study. Generally, a larger sample size will minimize the effects of individual outliers that are far to the left or the right of the median population. Swan et. al. (2000) and Sonner (1999) each had large sample populations. Several studies’ samples were not as large as I’d like to see. I believe that when a sample is too small, the researcher gets less consistent and reflective results. Tomei (2006) utilized only eleven students per instruction method, for a total of only twenty-two students. Beard et. al. (2004) only received responses from twenty-five of the original forty-two students. Spooner et. al. (1999) had a disproportionally small sample of men (eight) versus women (forty-two) which wouldn’t be consistent with an average population of students. Finally, Vamosi et. al. (2004) failed to have a clear identification of the sample sizes studied.

I recognized other problems with sample populations as well. Spooner et. al. (1999) researched numerous classes instead of focusing on only one class for each method of delivery. In general, this technique can be a strength, however in this case, it diluted the original sample population and allowed for only four or six students in a particular class that was studied. Swan et. al. (2000) had too broad of a sample population for a strong analysis of the data. Swan et. al. (2000) collected data and consolidated it from samples in nine subjects spanning all four high school grades. It isn’t a preferable to consolidate a sample population that broad. This expansive sample, and accompanying data collection, then drove the study to make five broad conclusions that were not initially identified as research questions or hypotheses. I feel that Sonner’s (1999) sample was too broad and encompassing as well. Sonner (1999) studied eighty-seven students taking classes in three uniquely different types of distance education, to include a television class, a correspondence class, and a self-study. The biggest concern I have with the sample and methodology is how Sonner (1999) chose to take the findings from each class and then consolidate the sample together to analyze the data at the end.

9

I identified further sample weaknesses as well. Braun (2008) did not randomly assign any part of the sample, and Vamosi et. al. (2004) does not provide background information regarding the sample to include size, sex, or background. Lastly, Tomei (2006) did not take into account that only 18% of his sample had previously had experience with distance education, and that this could negatively influence student perception.

Beard et. al. (2004), Ponzurick et. al. (2000), and Braun (2008) allowed for open-ended questions in their surveys and during interviews. Open-ended questions allow for the researchers to get clear information regarding their samples’ perceptions. Also, these teams of researchers effectively incorporated Likerttype scales for survey questions. Dellana et. al. (2000) analyzed open-ended questions as well, and effectively analyzed student perceptions gleaned from the questions with regard to their GPAs. Whereas Warren et. al. (2005) only utilized close-ended questions, and in this study I see that as a shortfall.

Article strengths also included the thorough statistical analysis of Vamosi et. al. (2004), a clear and logical analysis and interpretation by Braun (2008), and the internal consistency estimates conducted by Spooner et. al. (1999). Tomei (2006) clearly identified the questions and hypothesis at the beginning of the article and Warren et. al. (2005) smartly utilized outside evaluators for the overall assessment of the students’ course work and surveys, in an attempt to provide a less biased analysis. I think it was logical and effective for Dellana et. al. (2000) to research students that took both their distance education and traditional courses from the same instructor. The same instructor teaching for each mode of delivery should eliminate bias that two different teachers would inevitably have. Sonner (1999) clearly identified that his research was done from one small “south-eastern university” and that his results may not be representative of other universities.

Weaknesses within the articles included the fact that Ponzurick et. al. (2000) only focused on student grades as compared to course mode of delivery, and therefore, they failed to take into account student perceptions. Also, Ponzurick et. al. (2000) based their findings on the grades that students received in classes utilizing three different teachers. If the study could be accomplished with only one teacher

10

teaching each class sequentially, there would be less room for bias in the findings. Beard et. al (2004) studied students’ perceptions regarding distance education, however, it was the first time that the majority of the students took a distance education course utilizing the internet. Therefore, many students had frustrations with website navigation that more experienced internet using students may not have. Braun (2008) failed to use analysis to determine reliability. Sonner’s (1999) study had a large enough sample only because it was conducted over several semesters. I believe with that longevity, students’ perceptions could have dramatically changed over the years based on delivery mode experience and their overall familiarity with it.

I identified two weaknesses in the Dellana et. al. (2000) study, to include the distance education sample size was more than twice the size of their traditional classroom sample. Also, Dellana et. al. (2000) considered a course that split its delivery between distance education and the traditional classroom, as a completely distance education class for the purposes of their study. I believe the naming convention for their class delivery was a bit deceptive.

Position Statement I chose ten articles to conduct the best practices literature review between the effectiveness of the traditional classroom and distance education modes of delivery. Five supported the argument that the traditional classroom delivery mode is as effective as or better than similar courses provided through distance education delivery, and five supported the opposing argument. My belief, based solely on the articles identified and reviewed, is that the research and subsequent journal articles supporting the effectiveness of distance education were overall the more convincing set of articles. Therefore, I would state that distance education is as effective as, or better than, the traditional classroom and is the best practice.

The articles supporting distance education had better samples overall. They were on average, larger and I believe more representative of like courses, whereas the traditional classroom samples were smaller and more channeled to the specific class. Also, sample responses were, in some cases, inferior in the

11

traditional classroom. Beard et. al. (2004) only had twenty-five of the original forty-two respond. If that large number of non-responders did respond, the potential exists for completely different findings.

I did identify strengths and weaknesses in the articles, but I would argue, based on the overall quality of the research, that the conclusions based on the findings, are the most significant piece of criteria in determining the best practice. The conclusions of all of those representing the traditional classroom argument, including Beard et. al. (2004), Dellana et. al (2000), Ponzurick et. al. (2000), Tomei (2006), and Vamosi et. al. (2004), identified a general student preference for the traditional classroom’s teacher to student interactions, but failed to identify any performance advantage for those students in the traditional classroom.

Distance education does provide flexibility and one researcher did find a performance advantage for distance education students. The researchers representing the distance education argument, including Braun (2008), Sonner (1999), Spooner et. al. (1999), Swan et. al. (2000), and Warren et. al (2005) all identified student preference for the greater flexibility that distance education provided, and one study did identify a performance advantage. Sonner (1999) found that students “did as well or better” in the capstone exercise if they took the at least one previous class through the distance education format. The research identified significant positive correlation between the number of distance learning courses the students had completed and their final class average.

In my opinion, distance education programs have proven that they can provide the student with a quality education. Distance education is here to stay and I predict that it will continue to grow and mature as new technologies develop that allow for more fluid and interactive distance education opportunities. I believe that distance education will never supplant the classroom, but nevertheless, it should be embraced as it can provide a unique opportunity for students to attend class that would not have otherwise had the chance. References

12

Abrahamson, C. (1998). Issues in interactive communication in distance education. College Student Journal, 32(1), 33-43. Sherry, L. (1995). Issues in Distance Learning. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 1(4), 337-365. Weinstein, P. (1997). Education Goes the Distance. Technology and Learning, 17(8), 24-25.

Annotated Readings Beard, L., & Harper, C. (2004). Student Perceptions of Online Versus On Campus Instruction. Education, 122(4), 658-663. This research indicated that students and instructors expressed concern about the lack of instructor to student interaction and the inability for the entire class to interact together. Some students also had hardware and software concerns. Many students said that they would take another internet based course but that they preferred the face-to-face interaction with instructors. Braun, T. (2008). Making a Choice: The Perceptions and Attitudes of Online Graduate Students. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 16(1), 63-92. Through a series of surveys, this study found that students’ desire for flexibility outweighed their apparent need for instructor and peer interaction in a traditional classroom. Those students surveyed also reported overall satisfaction with the online academic course content and instruction when compared to traditional classroom academic course content and instruction. Dellana, S., Collins, W., & West, D. (2000). On-Line Education in a Management Science CourseEffectiveness and Performance Factors. Journal of Education for Business, 75(5), 43-47. The findings demonstrate that a course consisting of face-to-face lecture with an on-line portion was just as effective as the same course that was only offered with the traditional face-to-face lecture. Grade point averages and classroom attendance were found to be associated with performance in both cases. Ponzurick, T., France, K., & Logar, C. (2000). Delivering Graduate Marketing Education: An Analysis of Face-to-face versus Distance Education. Journal of Marketing Education, 22(3), 180-187. The students, participating in this MBA course, found distance education to be a convenient but less effective and less satisfying alternative for delivering graduate marketing education in the classroom. The

13

authors caution that course adjustments, to improve both effectiveness and student satisfaction with distance education, must also consider how these adjustments affect course quality and the learning experience. Sonner, B. (1999). Success in the Capstone Business Course- Assessing the Effectiveness of Distance Learning. Journal of Education for Business, 74(4), 243-47. This study measured the performance of 85 students taking a capstone business course that were exposed to traditional classroom instruction and several distance learning techniques. The findings indicate that distance learning options can be an effective method to deliver information to students. Certain types of distance learning appeared to be associated with higher grades in the class than the traditional classroom method. Spooner, F., Jordan L., Algozzine, B., & Spooner, M. (1999). Student Ratings of Instruction in Distance Learning and On-Campus Classes. The Journal of Educational Research, 92(3), 132-140. This study found no differences in course, instructor, teaching, and communication ratings between distance and traditional classroom delivery modes. The authors believe, that due to the demonstrated effectiveness of distance learning, that there will be continued growth within this sector of the education field. Swan, M., & Jackman, D. (2000). Comparing the Success of Students Enrolled in Distance Education Courses vs. Face–to–Face Classrooms. Journal of Technological Studies, 24(1), 58-63. This study was primarily interested in comparing student GPA’s between traditional classroom and distance learning delivery techniques. The authors compared the GPA’s of students taking identical courses by means of distance education and the traditional classroom delivery styles. The authors found no statistical difference in student performance measured by their GPA’s. Tomei, L. (2006). The Impact of Online Teaching on Faculty Load: Computing the Ideal Class Size for Online Courses. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 14(3), 531-541. This study demonstrated that distance education demands more of an instructor’s available time than the more traditional classroom delivery method. These demands must be considered when allocating the number of students per course, and schools must understand the implications of larger class sizes with regard to the effectiveness of teaching.

14

Vamosi, A., Pierce, B., & Slotkin, M. (2004). Distance Learning in an Accounting Principles CourseStudent Satisfaction and Perceptions of Efficacy. Journal of Education for Business, 79(6), 360-366. Students in this study took a course that had both distance and traditional classroom portions. Students experienced less satisfaction with the distance learning modes and they found them, as a whole, to be less interesting and less efficient for learning. Warren, L. & Holloman, H. Jr. (2005). On-line Instruction: Are the Outcomes the Same? Journal of Instructional Psychology, 32(2), 148-151. This study found that there were no significant overall differences between the students that took this particular course using the on-line distance delivery techniques and of those students that took the course in the traditional brick and mortar setting. The researchers tested for significant differences between the two delivery techniques in the areas of student self assessment, course grade distribution, and instructor overall effectiveness.

15