Research in distance education (DE) has varying reports of DE effectiveness relative to classroom instruction (CI). One or more media types can be used in DE (e.g. video, bulletin board, print, simulations, conferencing, and text chat), just as classroom environments lend to a wide mix of interactions not possible in DE. It is important to identify, from the 232 studies with comparisons of DE and CI, relatively equal applications of DE and CI, regardless of the media used (Bernard et al., 2004).

Personal Experience

I have experienced varying amounts of success with DE. Classes I have taken online in the past have included music appreciation, computer network security, world literature, measurement and evaluation in education, and how to use Microsoft Office. Though academic publications strive to lay down a blanket statement of DE success or failure, world literature has far different content from computer network security. In some cases, having a class online was just an opportunity for the instructor to put their lecture material online or use an online drop-box for turning in homework. World literature had a large course segment of reading, but the instructor took advantage of online tools to create thought provoking topics and discussion online, whereas the computer network security course was just online to assign which chapters to read and turn in the chapter-end answers in an online drop box.

Background

Bernard et al. (2004) wrote about a study by Shale (1990). Shale argues DE ought to be regarded as equivalent education to CI, just at a distance. All of the process of education when teacher and student meet face-to-face also constitutes the same process of education when teacher and student are physically separated. To wit, regardless of the media, DE and CI should be relatively equal. In fact, Bernard et al. (2004) identified a widely cited report where Russell (Russell, 1999) compiled a list of 355 DE studies claiming no significant differences between DE and CI; however, according to Bernard et al., Russell failed to define studies of equal quality and rigor, instead basing the report on fragmented annotations (e.g., "...no significant difference was found...").

Even for those who have done research to find benchmarks for individuals' online learning aptitude, Maki and Maki (2003) found evidence to suggest readiness questionnaires to judge success in online verses lecture satisfaction are not useful. Maki and Maki believe web-based courses provide a better learning experience because it allows the instructor to enforce deadlines and provide feedback without the need for a face-to-face meeting. Compounding methods of instructional design to cover multiple learning theories helps give learners more opportunities to encode information to memory (Bruning, Schraw, Norby, & Ronning, 2004).

Question for the Issue

A study of online verses traditional lecture courses showed students did as well or better than students who attended lecture in a course on casual and statistical reasoning (Scheines, Leinhardt, Smith, & Cho, 2005). However, the same publication from Scheines et al. admits a long list of contrasting research showing either no difference between online learning and lecture (Carey, 2001; Hiltz, 1993; Mishra, 2002), a failure of online learning to match success of lecture-based courses (Brown & Liedholm, 2002), or just a complete difference in the core skill outcomes of CI and DE (Yumuk, 2002). Smaller recitation lectures were shown to be more effective than large audience lectures in the study by Scheines et al. (2005). This contrast of outcomes stimulated a review of the literature, which set out to answer the following question: What are some factors that might explain the differences in outcomes of supposed identical DE and CI?

Method

Articles published between 1995 and 2005 were accessed via PsycARTICLES and PsycINFO. Searches were limited to start at 1995 to recognize the significance of Microsoft Windows 95 as a landmark change in options available for web-based DE. The sole search, "evaluating distance education" was employed to identify potentially useful articles. Where references in articles from the APA-based research databases could not be found, Academic Search Premier, ERIC, Primary Search, and Professional Development Collection were searched, in addition to Google Scholar to search the Internet for original texts. In total, 43 articles relating to web-based DE were reviewed.

Results

Initial searching identified only two articles, however one was a meta-analysis of empirical literature, which was used as a resource to identify potential studies with related characteristics. For the purposes of this review, DE is limited to web-based instruction, which involved omitting many articles classifying interactive television and courses by correspondence as DE.

The use of a computerized peer tutoring system helped 10-year-old students develop their creative thinking by trying to teach each other in an electronic environment (Wheeler, Waite, & Bromfield, 2002). The same study also admitted the lower attainment students tended to get off task by roaming around the Internet. Interviews in the Wheeler, Waite, and Bromfield (2002) study asserted learning did not really start until skills of using the online learning environment became "over-learned". In sum, the Wheeler, Waite, and Bromfield study did not employ a specific grounded instructional method and came to its conclusions by qualitative interview processes.

Mishra (2002) tried to identify the most important parts of DE and CI in her proposal of a design framework for learning environments. In her framework, she identified the following areas of importance in combining the best elements of CI, mixed mode instruction, and DE:

• Behaviorism and content
• Objective-based course units
• Self-assessment online
• Constructivism and learning activities
• Participation in discussion forums
• Email contact
• Reading lessons
• Cognitivism and learner support
• Learner guide
• Mentor support online
• Online library
• Social interaction
• Synchronous chat-counseling

The ADAPT model uses a similar blended approach to instruction. Using the ADAPT instructional design for computer-mediated coursework yielded a significantly higher post hoc average GPA of the ADAPT students in comparison to a conventional classroom version of the same coursework (Tuckman, 2002). The ADAPT method defined itself from the classroom instruction by offering self-surveys, quick practices with immediate feedback, multiple-choice and short essay spot quizzes, and online discussions. A number of other studies found higher post-test scores with students in DE courses over CI (Schulman & Sims, 1999).

A recurring theme in the research is a perception of greater workload associated with DE over CI (Noyes, Garland, & Robbins, 2004). Noyes, Garland, and Robbins reasoned that lower-performing individuals are disadvantaged when taking computer-based assessments (p. 113). Brown and Liedholm (2002) found students in web-based courses needed to work harder and failed to recognize important concepts relative to their classmates who attended lecture. Some possible explanations for the difference between DE and CI include difference in typefaces on a computer monitor verses paper and differing resolution on computer monitors (Clariana & Wallace, 2002). As a result, students given identical assessments in computer format and on paper can have significant differences in outcomes. A different explanation of differing outcomes agrees with the original assertion of DE and CI (Shale, 1990). Better performance was observed for courses with an online component of assessment in an environment where instruction was equivalent (Caywood & Duckett, 2003).

None of the aforementioned studies have a solid answer to the effectiveness of DE. What the studies do prove is the effectiveness of DE for causal and statistical reasoning, business undergraduate, or psychology students (Carey, 2001; Clariana & Wallace, 2002; Scheines, Leinhardt, Smith, & Cho, 2005; Waschull, 2001). If research had already pinpointed the benefits, pitfalls, and best-case scenarios of DE, it would likely have a stronger presence in grade schools. Studies seem to include have research subjects in grade school, and in higher education for the arts and sciences.

An Important Methodological Issue

Many studies were excluded from the review because they were based largely or in whole on the perceptions of students and instructors, without any data on the actual educational differences between DE and CI. While perceptions likely play a role, I don't think they should be used as the sole basis for declaring success or failure of DE, as some publications did.

How My Understanding Changed

This research showed strong findings that DE and CI had essentially identical learning qualities. Future research might include definitively identifying some causes for significant differences between scores on computer-based assessments verses paper format. If perceptions of students and teachers are included in effectiveness studies, they could also potentially account for a correlation between the success of computer-based assessments and DE over CI.

There doesn't appear to be a single thread of research attempting to identify DE as either good or bad for sociology courses, good or bad for art appreciation, good or bad for a police academy, etc. Narrowing down whether DE is better for the arts and not the sciences could be important base information to guide what particular aspects of DE are best for teaching economics, sociology, or computer programming.

How I Was Affected

Mishra (2002) had one of the shortest articles I reviewed, but it made one of the most significant impressions on me as well as did Shale (1990). I had not considered DE and CI instruction to be essentially equivalent, especially since Mishra seemed to make fun of instructors who do nothing more than post their lecture materials online. As I thought about it, the instructor, in both DE and CI, has certain material to cover. Though the medium may change, the same learning could be occurring, placing the blame for differences on other factors. I suppose simply feeling more excited about taking an exam on a computer than on paper could have an effect on the outcome of the final score. As a professional, I will need to be concerned with making sure the score outcomes for computer-based assessments are the same as paper-based, as Amoroso (2004) identified.

References

Bernard, R. M., Abrami, P. C., Lou, Y., Borokhovski, E., Wade, A., Wozney, L., et al. (2004). How does distance education compare with classroom instruction? A meta-analysis of the empirical literature. Review of Educational Research, 74(3), 379-439.

Brown, B. W., & Liedholm, C. E. (2002). Can web courses replace the classroom in principles of microeconomics? American Economic Review, 92(2), 444-448.

Bruning, R. H., Schraw, G. J., Norby, M. M., & Ronning, R. R. (2004). Cognitive psychology and instruction (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall.

Carey, J. (2001). Effective student outcomes: A comparison of online and face-to-face delivery modes. Retrieved October 16, 2005, from http://www.ed.psu.edu/acsde/deos/deosnews/deosnews11_9.asp

Caywood, K., & Duckett, J. (2003). Online vs. on-campus learning in teacher education. Teacher Education and Special Education, 26(2), 98-105.

Clariana, R., & Wallace, P. (2002). Paper-based versus computer-based assessment: key factors associated with the test mode effect. British Journal of Educational Technology, 33(5), 593-602.

Hiltz, S. R. (1993). Correlates of learning in a virtual classroom. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 39(1), 71-98.

Maki, R. H., & Maki, W. S. (2003). Prediction of learning and satisfaction in web-based and lecture courses. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 28(3), 197-219.

Mishra, S. (2002). A design framework for online learning environments. British Journal of Educational Technology, 33(4), 493-496.

Noyes, J., Garland, K., & Robbins, L. (2004). Paper-based versus computer-based assessment: is workload another test mode effect? British Journal of Educational Technology, 35(1), 111-113.

Russell, T. L. (1999). The no significant difference phenomenon. Chapel Hill: Office of Instructional Telecommunications, University of North Carolina.

Scheines, R., Leinhardt, G., Smith, J., & Cho, K. (2005). Replacing lecture with web-based course materials. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 32(1), 1-25.

Schulman, A. H., & Sims, R. L. (1999). Learning in an online format versus an in-class format: An experimental study [Electronic Version]. THE Journal, 26. Retrieved November 20, 2005 from http://www.thejournal.com/magazine/vault/A2090.cfm.

Shale, D. (1990). Toward a reconceptualization of distance education. In M. G. Moore (Ed.), Contemporary issues in American distance education (pp. 333-343). Oxford, England: Pergamon Press.

Tuckman, B. W. (2002). Evaluating ADAPT: a hybrid instructional model combining Web-based and classroom components. Computers & Education, 39(3), 261-269.

Waschull, S. B. (2001). The online delivery of psychology courses: Attrition, performance, and evaluation. Teaching of Psychology, 28(2), 143-147.

Wheeler, S., Waite, S. J., & Bromfield, C. (2002). Promoting creative thinking through the use of ICT. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18(3), 367-378.

Yumuk, A. (2002). Letting go of control to the learners: The role of the Internet in promoting a more autonomous view of learning in an academic translation course. Educational Research, 44(2), 141-156.