I was recently handed an article from a recent Review of Educational Research (Spring 2006) that focused on teaching courses online. This article is a literature review covering online education, Internet courses, distance teaching and learning, and Web-based instruction. A total of 76 studies are cited with a fair mix of quantitative and qualitative research. I had a feeling I would be in for a bumpy ride when the authors immediately reported complications in their analysis due to inconsistencies in terminology (e.g., is an online course a World Wide Web course, or an Internet course, or a computer-based course, or a cyberspace course, etc.).
My two cents:
This review uncovers several contradictory findings about the best way to conduct teaching and learning online. The findings suggest that what works for one set of students, doesn’t work for another group with often little to no accounting for these inconsistencies. For example, one study showed how well asynchronous discussions “mimicked the dynamics of real-time multivoiced discussions,” while another study observed that they provide a “lack of fluidity and conversational language” (p. 96).
Another interesting finding suggested the importance of recognizing students’ feelings, reactions, and responses in an online environment. At first after reading this observation I was struck by how odd it sounded. I have attended college courses off and on for over 10 years and I have trouble recalling students’ feelings ever being openly considered in class by a professor. I have seen professors recognize and respond to students’ reactions and responses, but never a student’s feelings. Is it because college classes are places where the focus is primarily on an objective reality as opposed to a subjective one? A place where students’ feelings are considered inappropriate and therefore not an issue? I’m not quite sure what to make of this finding.
What I found lacking in the research are repeated studies. It seems a study is conducted once with n number of subjects in a specific content area, and out of this, claims are being made, best practices are being defined. Is a sample of 400 professors adequate and representative of the entire professorate population? In my mind, this does not serve the discipline of academic or sociological research well. Before claims of what works best are made, it would seem studies need to show reliable and valid results over repeated trials. Perhaps because online teaching and learning is a relatively new endeavor, there hasn’t been enough time to gather good data. In the meantime, professors need tenure, so they will publish their research regardless of its merit (Ouch! Did I say that?).
Also worth noting is the amount of time researchers spend comparing elements of online courses with face to face courses. Isn’t this like comparing apples to oranges? How much coding of dialogue takes place when researchers evaluate face-to-face courses? What does such an analysis reveal? If it’s depth or complexity or levels of engagement, doesn’t that have more to do with the course facilitator and the course design? Should we be studying which personality types make better instructors/facilitators? And what would such findings lead to? Firing all instructors who have inconsistent or inappropriate teaching personalities? Wow, what a concept! (Would that be a good thing or a bad thing?).
To no surprise, the article reports “no comprehensive theory or model that informed studies of online instruction” (p. 115). Most instructors or designers simply move text-based courses to the Internet following some form of pedagogy/androgogy and there are very few studies that examine this phenomenon. Perhaps it is wise to ask if there are any special guidelines needed? Is this another matter of personality wherein good instructors/facilitators follow basic pedagogical assumptions and then tweak them over time adjusting for the various assignments and levels of engagement? Would guidelines as such stifle creativity or provide support weaker instructors?
Without going into greater detail, the article provides a helpful stepping off point for exploring various aspects of teaching and learning online as well as differing aspects of online learning environments worth considering. Ultimately literature reviews of this type provide researchers opportunities to explore what’s happening in a particular field and often points the way to future research possibilities. As such, anybody studying distance education or online learning will probably find the bibliography and appendices quite helpful on a variety of levels.
Reference:
Tallent-Runnels, M.K., et al. (2006). Teaching courses online: A review of research. Review of Educational Research. 76(1): 93-135.
Photo credit:
Researchers (pencil and watercolour), 1970 © The Estate of John David Roberts
Keywords: distance education, Internet courses, learning, literature review, online teaching, pedagogy, research, teaching, Web-based instruction
Comments
Chris-
One thing I think is important to remember is that there is still a face behind the course. That is, although I may never hear or see my professors, I've discovered my online courses definitely take on a unique "flavor," depending on who is instructing. Some are better suited to online teaching the way some educators are better suited for, say, middle school rather than high school.
Oftentimes I think the perception is that since we are interacting via a machine there is very little feeling associated with the courses (those feelings, or lack thereof, were something else addressed in the article.) While I don't disagree that some of the personalization is removed in an Internet-based course, I would argue that emotions can, and usually do, manifest themselves in one way or another.
I suppose the real question is: does it matter? Does it make a different in education?
Thanks again for your thoughts.
I find that online learning will be the next best thing in education in the future. I also agree with you that they didn't do a very good research report on this topic. 400 professors don't equal the whole population. I feel that online learning is great for students who don't like to talk alot in class because they are shy. This gives them a chance to voice their opinion without the fear of being looked down at or other students laughing at them.
I don't think that firing teachers because they don't have a certain personcality is a good idea either. I think that you need teachers with different personalities because all of your students have different personalities and that way they=may be able to relate to one better than another.
I think that this a good topic to research because technology is getting bigger and bigger by the day and researching this topic could help schools and universities tremendously in the future.
Thanks for your time-
Melissa Winterhalter
Christina,
Sorry for my delayed response. I've been having some email issues recently which I think I finally resolved (fingers crossed). You make a good point about emotions or the affective side of online teaching and learning. I think emotions, feelings, are very important and are an often overlooked component in teaching and learning environments and research. I think they do matter and come through in various forms. Since we are often limited to textual interactions, the words we choose have great import as does our response time, the length, breadth, and depth of our responses. These aspects carry much weight and say a lot about who we are and our level of care and commitment. The people I know who get good instructor evaluations will tell you they often spend a lot more time managing their student relationships online then they do face-to-face. I have also found that my online students show a higher level of commitment and deication to their work. Perhaps it's a condition of the level of commitment and organization needed to succeed in an online course. It's a subject definitely worth researching.
Melissa,
Thank you for your comments. I am taking a course now on the theory of measurement which asks us to examine research and the factors that underscore relaibaility and validity. When I read the article cited above, I was struck by the lack of details the authors chose to include that really impact the validity of the research.
I agree online learning will have a significant impact on the future of teaching and learning. I think it is a generational thing, that is, it will take a generation or so for it to real take root. And you're correct, studies have shown that online teaching and learning environments work quite well for students who do not speak up regularly in a face-to-face environment. I think it also has something to do with how an online course is designed so as to engage all participants at a variety of levels.
I have always been a people watcher. I think human nature is amazing and I love studying it. Having taught in secondary and post-secondary environment, I am always amazed at the people who decide to go into teaching yet obviously do not belong. Why do they do it? I've watched instructors struggle to make it through lessons and courses and I wonder why they keep coming back. meanwhile I have also watched and participated with teachers who are simply amazing, people who I try to model myself after because they really make what they are doing seem easy (even though we know it isn't always). Thus my question regarding teacher personalities. Is it fair to students to make them suffer through bad teaching/bad teachers? Is there anything that can be done about it? I wonder....
Regards, Chris
Chris,
I find the idea of this research topic interesting. Too bad the researchers did not carry through completely. Further research on this subject and on subsequent subtopics is surely needed. Online, distance learning is only going to evolve. It is not simply a trend that will see come and go. With changes in the economic structure of our nation, more adults are either seeking additional education in their current field of employment or taking on another new venture.
Research should continue in order to find some of the best practices (yes, plural). Depending on the nature of the course, best practices will vary.
From my own personal experience, online instruction needs to be a safe environment for students to express their ideas, open themselves up to take risks, and learn. Online students need to have established trust with their fellow online students and the instructor. The instructor needs to find a way to establish this trust in their online classroom. The instructor also needs to be disciplined. What I mean by this is they simply cannot post an assignment or discussion and disappear until the next posted assignment. The instructor can drive the course and the asynchronous discussions (for good or bad). The instructor needs to be engaged in the course and this allows them to be engaged with all of their students learning. This does not typically happen in a face-to-face typical classroom. This in itself would be a good research topic.
It is better to replace the traditional classroom where the teacher uses a chalkboard/whiteboard to teach a class with online videos because: (1) the teacher does almost all the talking and there is hardly any interaction time in the classroom (2) the student often forgets or does not understand all the material taught, else they would all be scoring close to 100% for tests.
With online videos, students can view the lessons as many times as they wish. From our expereience in watching movies or TV, the more times we watch a movie, the better our retention and we can grasp even more details which we missed earlier. Hence, assuming the online video lesson is comprehensive enough, students should be able to score close to 100% on tests because they would have acquired all the necessary information they need after sufficient number of viewings of the online video lesson.