TOJDE January 2002 ISSN 1302-6488 Volume:3 Number:1
An Exploratory Study
George
E. Nakos
Michael H. Deis
Louis Jourdan
Clayton
College & State University - USA
INTRODUCTION
Although universities have evolved
through the years, the basic delivery of instruction has remained unchanged.
One could say that the way most students learn today, students going
to a university classroom to listen to a lecture delivered by a professor,
is similar to the way students were learning 150 or even 200 years ago.
While some attempts have been made in the past to change the way students
are learning in a traditional classroom setting, most of those attempts
have failed. In the 1950s, with the popularization of the new revolutionary
technology, television, many forward thinkers imagined an educational
system where thousands or even millions of students would be listening
to the same lecture from world famous professors. Of course, after the
initial excitement, television did not prove to be a very viable alternative
in replacing the traditional classroom. In other cases, public and private
universities have experimented with different types of correspondence
courses. While some schools, like the University of Maryland in the
United States and the Open University in the United Kingdom, have had
some success with specific student populations, in most instances degrees
obtained through a “correspondence” school have had a fairly bad reputation
(Dash, 2000; Carpenter, 1998).
The advent of the World Wide Web and the widespread use of computers
have generated an unprecedented interest in on-line education. Universities,
after investing millions of dollars in acquiring advanced computer technology,
are looking for ways to reach students more efficiently and effectively.
The main goals of on-line education are to eliminate the need of the
traditional classroom and to provide a better more efficient learning
environment for students (Eastman and Swift, 2001). Students do not
need to come to a fixed physical location to take a course; on-line
courses can be taken at anytime, anywhere. Lectures and class discussions
are delivered through the internet in a synchronous or asynchronous
way. This movement towards on-line instruction has not been limited
to for-profit institutions, such as Phoenix University in the US, but
has even spread to prestigious private and public institutions. In the
last couple of years, prestigious US institutions like Duke University,
The University of Chicago, and the Wharton School of the University
of Pennsylvania, among others, have offered on-line MBA degrees. The
interesting facet of on-line instruction is the interest that it has
generated among private sector companies. Possibly for the first time
in educational history, many business people are seeking to create for-profit
institutions. The list is long and includes software billionaire Michael
Sawyer, who plans to spend $100 million in establishing a free web site
offering access to the “greatest minds of our times”, and the 1980s
controversial financial figure Michael Milken, who is investing $500
million in an on-line venture (Lindquist, 2000). Even prominent previous
critics of on-line instruction, such as William Bennett, the former
US Secretary of Education, have recently reassessed their opinions of
on-line instruction. While last year he stated that “there is no good
evidence that most uses of computers significantly improve learning,”
this year he described the new technology as “the only way to reach
everybody” (Time Magazine, 2001).
From the previous examples, it is becoming evident that on-line instruction
will become an integral part of higher education for the foreseeable
future. While many researchers have looked at issues such as the performance
of students in on-line courses versus the performance of students in
on-campus classes (Huff, 2000) and the cost efficiency of on-line instruction
(Carr, 2000), there have been very few studies on how students perceive
on-line courses. This study tries to answer several research questions
by surveying upper level business students at Clayton College &
State University (CCSU), located in Morrow, Georgia. CCSU has experimented
with on-line courses since January 1997 and was a pioneer in offering
non-traditional instruction in the Southeastern United States. The questions
that this study proposes to answer include: the reasons that students
select on-line courses; what type of computer familiarity and training
these students have; what has been their experience with on-line courses;
what do they consider as necessary factors to be included in an on-line
course; and their overall satisfaction with on-line instruction.
This research is important because on-line instruction is a new concept,
and we still do not know how students perceive it and what are the important
factors for success in the on-line environment. The vast majority of
college professors have been trained to transmit knowledge in the traditional
classroom environment. This training may or may not be sufficient to
create satisfactory teaching experiences in the new on-line world. By
asking students to discover what they consider as important factors,
academics will become better at adjusting and succeeding in the new
on-line environment (Visser and Visser, 2000)
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
Although there are many articles on on-line education, the effectiveness
and even perception of on-line education is an issue that must be addressed.
In addition, the exponential growth of courses being offered via distance
education mandates that consideration be given to students’ perceptions
of their on-line learning experiences (Petracchi, 2000). As Pettracchi
indicated, increasing the knowledge of how students perceive on-line
education will assist educators in enhancing the value of the learning
experience. Other authors (Long et al, 2000) have stressed that the
rise in the number of students taking on-line courses has caused more
quality assurance programs in the field. One way of addressing the quality
concerns of on-line instruction is to survey the perceptions of students
taking these courses.
Perceptions of courses taken on-line vary. According to a survey of
247 corporate recruiters administered by Business Week magazine, almost
all the respondents would not consider in hiring a recipient of an on-line
MBA (Dash 2000). Dash (2000) also indicated that some students have
become concerned about the additional costs involved, often 20% than
fees of similar programs offered on campus. Another study (Carr, 2000),
indicated that students taking courses on-line were generally less happy
than students taking similar courses on-campus. Carr’s study suggested
that it might be beneficial to develop tests to be given to students
to determine the appropriate type of instruction. Somewhat surprisingly,
there has been an extensive belief among educators that the type of
technology used in on-line education plays only a small role in determining
student satisfaction (Reis, 2000). Reis’ article indicated, though,
that students are often frustrated within the on-line environment. However,
not everybody agrees with this view, Johnstone and Krauth (1996) reported
that achievement and satisfaction for students taking on-line courses
is not significantly different from students taking on-campus courses
(Johnstone and Krauth, 1996).
Many students appreciate the flexibility and benefits from taking on-line
courses. It makes it much easier for them to complete their educational
goals, even while they are at home, at work, or on vacation (Hitchock,
1999). In Visser and Visser’s study (2000), almost half of the study
participants cited flexibility of the instructional mode as the primary
reason for choosing to enroll in distance education courses. There is
definitely support for the offering of on-line courses, but, as expected,
students often question the method of delivery (Schulman and Sims, 1999).
An increasing number of educators are becoming concerned that on-line
education does not improve the learning process (Frost and Fukami, 1997),
and some authors have even questioned whether on-line technology is
pedagogically more effective than older technology (Bates, 1994). Some
educators are also concerned that an on-line course does not offer the
same value as an on-campus course (Mangan, 1999), and one author (McCollum,
1999) has voiced his concerns that the perceived lack of quality in
on-line courses might have an effect on the certification process for
universities. Healy (1999) stated that some educators felt that money
was being spent disproportionately on on-line education when it should
have been spent on instructional development. In addition, although
the percentage of colleges offering distance education programs increased
from 48% in 1998 to 72% in 1999, the American Federation of Teachers
(AFT) in July 2000 passed a resolution encouraging new quality standards
for college distance-education programs (Henry, 2000). The AFT even
recommended that undergraduate programs include some classroom-based
coursework. Another study (Boehle, Dobbs, and Stamps, 2000) concluded
that some courses can effectively be taught on-line, but also cautioned
against offering undergraduate programs entirely on-line.
It is important that the goals and stated outcomes of similar courses
taught on-line and on-campus are the same. Because of their very nature,
however, on-line courses often tend to be passive in character and do
not meet the interactive requirements of a successful course. The reason
for this lack of interactivity may be the cost associated with constant
professor and student interaction. Educators must continually seek ways
for students to still have interactive experiences when taking on-line
courses (Huff, 2000). Robinson (1995) emphasized the importance of student
support through assistance and guidance from various sources. Distance
education programs provide three (3) means of support for students.
First, academic support provides students with cognitive and meta-cognitive
tools and resources needed for linking student performance to course
goals. Second, affective support refers to the motivational needs of
the student. Third, administrative support involves assistance with
logistical components such as registration, fee payment, and ordering
of course materials (Visser and Visser, 2000). In addition, each college
must adopt policies on on-line courses to meet the needs of its specific
student body (Young, 2000). Schools have different cultures and thus
different expectations relevant to their on-line education programs
(Young, 2000).
METHOD
The population for this study were students taking junior and
senior level courses at Clayton College and State University. The University
is an ideal location for such a study because of its involvement in
an Information Technology Project (ITP). In the fall of 1997, CCSU became
only the third U.S. public university, and the first in the Southeast,
to provide all of its students with notebook computers. The program
is unique because the students do not own or lease the computers. Instead,
they are required to pay an additional student fee of $300 per semester
for use of the computer. The university offers over 80 courses on-line,
and students have the choice of taking similar courses either on-line
or in a traditional classroom setting. The experience that the University
has had with on-line instruction over the last four years, provided
an ideal laboratory environment to investigate the perceptions that
students have of on-line courses.
Out of an approximate total population of 400 junior and senior students,
200 names were selected randomly. The researchers were then successful
in collecting 160 questionnaires. Three questionnaires were not usable,
and a total of 157 usable questionnaires were collected.
RESULTS
The results of the study show a wealth of information about the diversity
of reasons for students taking on-line courses. Thirty-six percent of
the students had not taken any on-line classes and were not qualified
to answer the majority of the questions. However, they provided the
authors with some interesting reasons for not taking on-line courses.
Some of these reasons were: “I did not take them because I wanted to
take advantage of having the teacher available to me,” “I need personal
instruction,” “I’d rather attend the lectures because I learn more,”
“Most of my remaining classes would be more beneficial to me if I were
learning directly from the professor,” and “I normally do not take on-line
courses because I feel I learn better by listening versus self-study.”
These views show that on-line instruction is not for everybody, and
that there will always be a certain percentage of students suspicious
of new technology who are more comfortable in a traditional campus setting.
One hundred and twenty one of the respondents who completed the questionnaire,
77 percent of the respondents, had taken at least one on-line course
(Table 1). This high percentage of students exposed to on-line courses
shows how important such courses have become in certain institutions
of higher learning. The majority of the students responding to the survey
had taken two or three on-line classes. About 15 percent of the sample
had wide exposure to on-line classes and had taken five or more courses.
 |
||||
|
The subsequent
sections of the survey inquired about the reasons for selecting
on-line instruction instead of traditional classes. Table 2 presents
the reasons for taking on-line courses. Scheduling convenience
was selected by almost 80 percent of the respondents. The University
enrolls a large number of non-traditional working students. Although
all business courses are offered day and night, many students
have a hard time finding courses available at times that will
fit into their busy work and family schedules. On-line courses
seem to offer them the flexibility to take classes that otherwise
they might have been unable to take. The second most popular reason
for taking on-line courses is the ability to take more classes.
Fifty two percent of the respondents selected this reason. Conflict
with work schedules and time conflicts with another course were
some of the other important reasons. Lack of transportation and
need to stay home due to family obligations do not appear to be
important reasons for taking on-line courses. When looking at
the predominant reasons, universities have to be concerned with
students overloading their schedules with on-line courses. Students
might feel that they can take more courses, but often find that
they are not able to keep up with the course requirements.
|
||||
 |
||||
|
The vast majority
of CCSU students taking on-line classes felt that they had intermediate
or advanced computer skills (Table 3). These numbers reflect the
success of the laptop program that the University adopted in Fall
of 1997. Every student has access to a computer and 97.4% feel
that they have intermediate or advanced computer skills, although
approximately 40 percent of the students have not taken any formal
computer classes.
|
||||
 |
||||
|
Student
Evaluation of Online Courses
Table 4 presents information on a series of issues associated with on-line courses, from the presentation at an introductory orientation to success of on-line communication. Due to the fact that face to face communication, very frequent in a traditional classroom setting, does not exist in an on-line environment, students may feel isolated and without clear guidance about the direction of the course. Therefore it is very important for students to understand the technology and to be very clear about the course guidelines. Simple tasks, like scheduling exams and answering questions can become major issues if a clear communication network does not exist in the on-line environment. Our research indicates that the majority of students had a good or excellent experience with issues like overall presentation at orientation, explanation of purpose, objective, and grading procedures of course, ease of communication with instructors, instructor responsiveness or assistance with questions about assignments, course material etc, instructor led reviews for tests, scheduling of tests and other assignments, resolution of conflicts with other class tests or assignments, formats allowed for turning in assignments, lecture and/or lab course syllabus on the web, class notes on the web class notes on the web, presentation materials (power point) on the web, hyperlinks, textbook, audio and/or video course tapes, course specific software, connection to the internet, ease of access to e-mail, and assistance from the University technical personnel with computer-related problems. Very few students considered their experience to be unacceptable or in need of improvement. The data show a high degree of satisfaction and acceptance among students at CCSU. However, one has to keep in mind, that the numbers do not reveal anything about the quality of instruction of these courses, but the overall student attitude is positive. |
||||
|
||||
|
Table 5 presents
information on what factors students consider to be important
in an on-line class. Although students are taking an on-line class,
it is very important for them to be in touch with the instructor
and other classmates. From the data shown in the table, it appears
that a well-designed on-line course has to be interactive and
if there is not constant communication between the professor and
the students, the course satisfaction will possibly decline. Some
of the important issues from the students’ point of view for the
success of an on-line class are the availability of class notes,
study guides, interaction with the instructor, ability and ease
of asking questions, and ability to get assistance when needed.
Universities prior to introducing on-line courses have to very
closely look whether they can satisfy the needs of their students.
The technical capability of the computer network is one aspect
of the preparation. The training of the professors is another.
The demands that students have for interactive instruction, transforms
the on-line classroom into one-to-one interchange. Many Universities
perceive on-line education as a way of lowering their always-escalating
instructional costs (Eastman and Swift, 2001). However, the demands
for interactivity between instructor and individual students may
make successful on-line instruction more expensive than traditional
classroom-based methods.
|
||||
 |
||||
|
Table 6 presents information
on how satisfied students feel with on-line courses. Forty-eight
percent of students felt somewhat satisfied with their experience,
and 21.5 percent felt completely satisfied. These numbers definitely
indicate high satisfaction with on-line course experiences,
but Universities have to pay attention to the 19 percent of
students who did not feel that on-line courses met their particular
needs and are somewhat dissatisfied. Table 6 |
||||
 |
||||
| CONCLUSION,
RECOMMENDATIONS, AND SUGGESTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH This paper attempted to investigate the perceptions that college students have of on-line courses. Keeping in mind the limitations of the study and its exploratory nature, the results revealed interesting trends and insights about the views that students hold of on-line courses. Overall, it appears that students have accepted on-line courses as an alternative to the traditional classroom environment. In designing new forms of instruction, Universities in many cases ignore asking the students what they want. Universities need to study the views of students in order to better design on-line courses. This is an exploratory study of how students perceive on-line courses. Further research is needed to expand the scope of this paper and to see whether our results can be generalized in other university settings. Clayton College and State University is a very diverse campus with a large number of non-traditional students. Samples from more traditional campuses need to be taken to measure the satisfaction level of traditional students. Moreover, we have seen the increase of on-line instruction in graduate programs. It would be interesting to research whether graduate and undergraduate students have similar perceptions or whether their views and needs are different. Because it appears that on-line instruction is going to become part of college experience, further research is needed to understand it and improve it. REFERENCES Bates, A.W. (1994). Distance education, educational technology in. In T. Husen & T. N. Postlethwaite (Eds.), The international encyclopedia of education, (2nd ed., pp.1573 –1580). Oxford: Elsevier Science. Boehle, S., Dobbs, K., and Stamps, D. (2000). Two views of distance learning. Training, 37 (6), 34. June. Carpenter, Rebecca, 1998. The anywhere MBA. Canadian Business, 71 (17), p. 62-67. Carr, S. (2000). Online psychology instruction is effective, but not satisfying, study finds. Chronicle of Higher Education, 46 (27), pg. A48, March 10. Dash, E. (2000). The virtual MBA: A work in progress. Business Week, Issue 3701, pg. 96, Oct. 2. Eastman, Jacqueline and Swift, Cathy. 2001. New horizons in distance education: The online learner-centered marketing class. Journal of Marketing Education, 23, no. 1, pg. 25-34. Frost, P.J., and Fukami, C.V. (1997). Teaching effectiveness in the organizational sciences: Recognizing and enhancing the scholarship of teaching. Academy of Management Journal, 40 (6), 1271 – 1281. Healy, Jane. 1999. Why slow down the rush toward school computers? Education Digest, 65, 3, p. 32-37. Henry, Tamara (2000). Professors seek online standards. Courses need academic rigor. USA Today, pg. 7D, July 10. Hitchcock, J.A. (1999). A virtual experience University experience. Medford. 16 (4), pg. 14-15. July/August. Huff, M.T. (2000). A comparison study of live instruction versus interactive television for teaching MSW students critical thinking skills. Research on Social Work Practice. 10 (4), pg. 410 – 416. July. Johnstone, S.M., & Krauth, B. (1996). Balancing quality and access: Some principles of good practice for the virtual university. Change, 28 (2), 38 – 41. Lindquist, Christopher, 2000. Virtual diploma. Upside,12 (5) , pg. 175-184. Long, P.D, Tricker, T., Rangecraft, M., and Gilroy, P. (2000). Satisfaction with distance education: Evaluation of a service template. July. Mangan, K. S.(1999). Top business
school seek to ride a bull market in online M.B.A.'s Chronicle
of Higher Education, S: Information technology, 45(19), January
15 Young, J.R. (2000). College group
offers primer on policies for online education. T Chronicle of
Higher Education. 46 (39), pg. A49, June 2. |
 |
 |