0% found this document useful (0 votes)
14 views3 pages

Rick and Mo

Uploaded by

meyrickbevan11
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as TXT, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
14 views3 pages

Rick and Mo

Uploaded by

meyrickbevan11
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as TXT, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

How to ensure the quality of online learning in institutions of higher education

has been a growing concern


during the past several years. While several studies have focused on the
perceptions of faculty and administrators,
there has been a paucity of research conducted on students’ perceptions toward the
quality of online education.
This study utilized qualitative methods to investigate the perceptions of students
from two universities and one
community college regarding the quality of online education based on their own
online learning experiences.
Interviews and observations were conducted with three students. Various documents
were collected, digital and
printed. Positive and negative experiences of students were examined. Factors
that contribute to those experiences
were also identified. The findings of this research revealed that flexibility,
cost-effectiveness, electronic research
availability, ease of connection to the Internet, and well-designed class interface
were students’ positive
experiences. The students’ negative experiences were caused by delayed feedback
from instructors, unavailable
technical support from instructors, lack of self-regulation and self-motivation,
the sense of isolation, monotonous
instructional methods, and poorly-designed course content The findings can be used
by instructors to understand
students’ perceptions regarding online learning, and ultimately improve their
online instructional practices.
Introduction
With the fast development of the Internet, many colleges and universities have
offered online courses as a
viable alternative to traditional face-to-face instruction. However, considerable
concerns and problems have
developed, particularly as it relates to the quality of online education. Online
education, according to Harasim
(1989), is a new domain of learning that combines distance education with the
practice of face-to-face instruction
utilizing computer-mediated communication. Ascough (2002) suggested that online
education has the following
features: (a) it provides a learning experience different than in the traditional
classroom because learners are
different, (b) the communication is via computer and World Wide Web, (c)
participation in classroom by learners
are different, (d) the social dynamic of the learning environment is changed, and
(e) discrimination and prejudice is
minimized (p.1).
New technologies, the Internet, streaming video, net-meeting etc. now makes higher
education more
accessible and affordable for many students, and for those who would have been
unable to pursue higher education
in a traditional in-class setting (Bianco & Carr-Chellman, 2002). Consequently,
online learning has now become an
integral part of higher education institutions’ expanding curriculum.
The term online education is often associated with Internet education, virtual
education, cyber-learning, and
asynchronous learning (Office of Sustainable Development, 2000). Kearsly (2000)
reported the following themes
that shape online education: collaboration, connectivity, student-centeredness,
unboundedness, community,
exploration, shared knowledge, multisensory experience, and authenticity (p. 4-10).
Volery (2000) also concluded that online delivery is a form of distributed learning
enabled by the Internet.
According to Paulsen (2002), online education is characterized by:
• the separation of teachers and learners (which distinguishes it from face-to-face
education),
• the influence of an educational organization (which distinguishes it from self-
study and
private tutoring),
• the use of a computer network to present or distribute some educational content
• the provision of two-way communication via a computer network so that students
may benefit
from communication with each other, teachers, and staff. (p.1)
Online courses and degrees have been widely adopted by higher education
institutions as another method to
substitute traditional classroom instruction. Allen and Seaman’s (2003) recent
survey on online education delivered
by higher education institutions in the United States, found that at least 80% of
the course content delivered by those
institutions were delivered online. Regardless of the definition, an early
indication of the widespread popularity of
861
online education courses can be found in a survey conducted by the U.S. Department
of Education, which revealed
that more than 54,000 online education courses were being offered in 1998, with
over 1.6 million student’s enrolled
(cited in Lewis, et al., 1999). In a more recent study, Allen and Seaman (2003)
reported that: (a) over 1.6 million
students took at least one online course during the Fall of 2002, (b) over one-
third of these students (578,000) took
all of their courses online, (c) among all U.S. higher education students in Fall
2002, 11 percent took at least one
online course, and (d) among those students at institutions where online courses
were offered, 13 percent took at
least one online course (p.1).
Statement of the problem
Although it is has been reported in a recent study that 80% of course content
offered in institutions of
higher learning are being delivered online (Allen & Seaman, 2003), students in this
study were still reluctant to take
online courses and complained about the online classes they had taken. One
participant noted, “Not only does the
courses costs more, but they made me feel lost all the time” (Personal
communication, November 11, 2003).
Another participant stated, “The online class was very boring, and I don’t feel the
instructor helped me a
lot”(Personal communication, November 11, 2003). It appeared that these students
held unpleasant experiences
from their prior online learning experiences. What caused their negative
experiences? Was it the learner themselves?
Was it the program? Or was it because of the instructor? How do students perceive
the quality of online education
based upon their own online learning experiences? Are they satisfied or
dissatisfied with the online education they
have received? What are the factors that shape students’ online learning
experiences? All of those questions
prompted the present study and its investigation to explore students’ perceptions
towards the quality of online
education.
Rationale for study
As the number of online education courses in higher education has increased,
concerns and issues have
arisen about the quality of these courses (Yang & Cornelious, 2003). Many problems
that have arisen in online
education regarding its quality are often related, but not limited to: (a) the
requirement of separate quality assurance
standards, (b), programs having low (or no) quality standards, and (c) there is no
consensus on what constitutes
learning quality (Twigg, 2001).
Carnevale (2000) reported that Nick Smith (D, Michigan), the chairman of the House
of Representatives
science subcommittee on basic research expressed deep concerns about the quality of
internet-based courses during
a hearing in May of year 2000. Representative Smith stated that he remained
skeptical of the quality of online
learning, “... students who take courses online don't interact as much as their
peers in traditional courses, and that
they may walk away with knowledge but not with an understanding of how to think for
themselves (p. 51.)”
Concerns have also arisen as to the use of technology as a panacea to correct
financial problems of institutions rather
than serve as a valid teaching method (Hensrud, 2001). Brown & Green (2003) have
also argued that online course
delivery is often viewed by “administrators as a ‘cash cow’ venue – a means of
delivering instruction to a large
number of paying customers without the expense of providing things such as
temperature controlled classroom and

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy