Traditional classroom learning has been the standard for centuries. With the invention of computers and the internet, learning has been made available to take place right in the comfort of a student’s home. No longer is it a requirement to commute to campus and sit in a lecture hall. All this could be accomplished by turning on the computer. Online universities have begun to crop up in every corner of the cyber world. This has raised many questions within the education community, some of which will be addressed in this essay. Online learning is as effective as traditional learning, but some of what the classroom offers can never be achieved with technology. Honesty, cost, legitimacy, productivity, effectiveness of the curriculum, and accurate grades have all been called into question and are the crux issues over the online versus classroom debate.
Academic Dishonesty is an epidemic that stems from primary school up through Ph.D. courses. A survey done in 2006 showed 56% of graduate business students had cheated compared to 47% of graduate non-business students (Spaulding). A logical question that would arise is: would the lack of face to face accountability call into question a student’s ethical behavior? Would a student lacking traditional classroom supervision take advantage of an online environment and cheat?
Accountability is defined as the responsibility for conducting activities in a certain way or producing certain results (Anderman). If it is already known that cheating in a traditional setting is a serious problem then, when there is a setting where here is no physical accountability, would people take the easy road more often? Michael Spaulding’s researched looked at two situations: actual academic dishonesty and others perception of cheating.
“Perceptions are derived from a process through which our brain organizes and interprets what happens in one’s environment. Perceptions are influenced by past experiences, memories, expectations, suggestions, and context in which any given experience occurs” (Spaulding). He then goes on to contend that perceptions are an important aspect of this study of honesty because “perceptions provide a valuable reflection of the beliefs that individuals hold, in this case perceptions about academic dishonesty” (Spaulding). His findings were that any actual cheating was not increased in the online setting. However, he did find that students perceived that there was more academic dishonesty in other students, with no admittance to cheating themselves.
Students will have to live with the choices they make during their academic career. The code of conduct for each school is different, but every accredited center of learning does have a policy against cheating. From looking off a fellow student’s paper to plagiarism, none is tolerated in any legitimate institution. Spaulding surveyed a group of 103 students, and only nineteen had substantial knowledge of the university’s academic integrity policy located in the course syllabus (Spaulding).
The cost is another concern of students. Students come from all walks of life. Some have parents who can pay tuition. Many rely on scholarships and government financial aid to pay for school. When it comes to cost effectiveness, there is no difference (Soto). Carlos Soto, a contributing writer for Course Advisor, an education matching website, reminds us that online classes do save money from the aspect of never having to leave home.
If you take traditional classes, students must leave their home. The online student does not need to pay for transportation such as a personal vehicle, or public transportation. If driving to campus there are fuel and parking fees associated. Food can be prepared and eaten at home instead of purchased in the school. Students who live at home do not have to worry about room and boarding expenses. However, offline learning has its own costs.. Their online counterpart may include software fees, eBooks, and additional technology fees the school may charge (Soto).
Soto does make mention of a fact that is important when it comes to considering school cost can play a major factor. “If a school’s cost and process for earning your diploma seems to good to be true- they probably are”. There are schools out there that are scams to profit themselves and not the students. The U.S. Department of Education has a list of institutions that are accredited. This list is useful when determining whether or not an online program is valid (Soto).
The measurable outcomes are what drive education: grades, test scores, and overall performance. Teachers, students, and schools alike are regarded in light of scores. Marks determine funding, salaries, classes, placements, admission to different departments or schools. Without good scores, teachers lose jobs, schools get denied funding, and students have to repeat classes, or will not be admitted into programs desired.
The question that comes about with online programs is performance. Just as with honesty, the student is left to their own devices when it comes to their schooling. Do students work as hard when it comes to online classes? Do they complete the required course work? In the past there has not been any conclusive evidence to support one or the other (Singh).
In 2012 Shweta Singh, David Rlander, and Tina Mims of Texas Women’s University began research into this very issue. They set out to discover any difference when it comes to performance. “Performance tends to indicate a grade achieved by the student irrespective of whether student performance is a course grade or an item grade” (Singh).
With online classes students become the “management decision makers of their education. This was an unprecedented way of considering how to evaluate a student” (Singh). Also the “inputs” are how they determine active performance in class. That would be time spent studying, posting to online discussion forums, and the like.
The research followed a Consumer Behavior Class. One was entirely online, and one offline. Both had the same instructor, and were conducted in the same time period. The online had forty-four students, and the traditional class only twenty-six. At the end of the term data was collected on satisfaction, perceived level of learning, effort, and other characteristics (Singh).
Effort was the first criteria looked at. This looked at the exact number of hours students spent studying for the class each week. Students spending three to four hours a week studying for the class offline were 65%, and online were 46%. The one to two hour range was 23% of classroom students and 34% of online students. Finally, the effort of students who spend five hours or more studying for this class offline were 12% and online were 21% (Singh). The study shows that classroom students would spend less time outside of class studying. However, is that due to lack of work, or efficiency?
Efficiency was determined by “students who produce the highest possible outputs with given amounts of inputs” (Singh). The classroom students were found to be 38% efficient. Their online peers were coming in at a 56% efficiency rate. Online were found to be more efficient than traditional classroom students (Singh).
Grades are the bottom line. That is what is looked at as the big factor. 78% was the average score for the online class. The classrooms average score was 70%. Online students outperformed the traditional classroom students by 8% (Singh).
Satisfaction is a key aspect with learning. Did the student feel confident in the class? Was the class enjoyable? Did they begrudgingly muscle through a learning environment that was not satisfactory? Using a seven point scale they asked students to rank their satisfaction with the class. The online average rank was 6.15, while offline was 5.90 (Singh). Students rated that they were more satisfied with the online learning than the traditional classroom.
If we are to continue with the definition given by the researchers, that performance is to indicate the grade received by the student, across the board online came out on top. The data suggests that online learning is superior in productivity, efficiency, satisfaction, and grades.
Again, past studies found to be inconclusive showing a form of superiority. This study seems to show that online would be the better of the two. It is important to note that this is only plausible for some. Familiarity with the internet and computers would be important. An individual without a good working knowledge of the internet would find online courses to be much more difficult. Also, different learning styles make a real impact on education as well. If the student learns best in a peer group setting than the online environment would not be the best for them.
The colleges are not the only ones to work with online learning. Online learning is a growing trend in many primary and secondary schools around the world. Cyber Home Learning System(CHLS) and Cyber Home Learning Video Conferencing(CHLS-VC) are self-regulated for primary school learning (Lim).
It is not very common to find primary students working in this capacity. This is a growing trend in foreign countries, but still very few and far between. This helps with the cost of private education. It is also hoped to solve some foreign counties tension between economic classes. CHLS allows students access to education in rural and remote areas where they might not normally have it (Lim).
It is important to note that some fields of study are not possible to study in a removed online environment. In an interview with a nursing instructor at Fortis College, Kay Friedly, she stated “you cannot teach that(nursing) via a machine.” She went on to say that instructors “must be able to evaluate not only technical skills, but social skills and moral integrity. You cannot glean that through a computer.”
Friedly stated that there are certain “psycho-motor skills” that need to be developed through working in a hands-on environment. Moving a mouse and typing would not be sufficient for developing such skills in nursing. “There is a level of responsibility when you look eye to eye with a human being that you have to perform a procedure on, which cannot be attained through an online class”. To become a certified nurse one must become board certified. The instructor must believe that the student has the moral integrity to perform their duties and communicate that fact to the board of nursing. Friedly does not believe it would be possible to give such credence without ever working in a classroom with the student (Friedly).
I also spoke with a student named Victoria Johnson. She is completing her bachelors of arts at the University of Central Florida, and has taken both online and traditional classes in her college career. She felt it was better to take classes in the classroom. “The classroom makes it harder to procrastinate”, said Johnson. Johnson mentioned multiple times about the “responsibility” and “accountability” of being in that face to face environment.
Johnson believed she gained more from a classroom than her experience with online classes. “The interaction of the classroom is what made the difference. A professor might use a power point, and you would have to write notes. You do not get that from online. All an online class is, is reading.” She believed that the classroom was much more engaging that the online. She engaged visual, audial, and verbal learning styles in the classroom. On the other hand in the online courses it was primarily reading material from the computer.
I explained to Johnson the findings from the research found in the Efficiency of Offline vs. Online Learning. She was surprised to learn of the online results. She believed that more research would need to be conducted to truly know the truth. She suggested different groups, learning materials, or even instructors would have made a difference.
Johnson feels the biggest drawback to online learning is the communication. Johnson believes that the immediate interaction in the classroom with the instructor is far superior to having the set up an appointment to speak with them in person, or waiting on email correspondence.
On the subject of academic honesty Johnson believes that it is much easier to be dishonest in the disconnected land of cyberspace. “It is easy to use notes, or books on a test. Even pull up a Google search to find the answer,” commented Johnson. She mentioned the lack of someone’s physical eyes watching invokes less integrity in the individual student (Johnson). Johnson’s thoughts lined up with the findings of Michael Spaulding. In which students tend to believe more academic dishonesty in their fellow students than in themselves (Spaulding).
In this, the information age, computers have become the main source of entertainment, and learning. The numbers say that online learning is the way of the future. The statistics show that it is superior across the board to traditional classroom learning (Singh). However, students and instructors alike are not convinced. Some question the legitimacy of the schools (Soto). Others focus more concern on student integrity in the disconnected online environment (Spaulding). More research into this matter will need to make conclusive claims as to a superior method of education. One thing remains certain: education is evolving.
Works Cited
Anderman, Eric M., Anderman, Linly Hicks. Psychology of Classroom Learning: An Encyclopedia. Detroit: Psychology of classroom learning [electronic resource] : an encyclopedia / Eric M. Anderman, editor-in-chief ; Lynley H. Anderman, co-editor, 2009.
Angiello, Roanne. "Study Looks at Online Learning Vs Traditional Instruction." Education Diguest 2010: 1.
Friedly, Kay. Insrturctor. Michael Shannon. March 2013.
Johnson, Victoria. Student. Michael Shannon. March 2013.
Lim, Doo Hun, Morris, Michael L, Kurpritz, Virginia W. "Online Vs Blended Learning: Differences in INstructional Outcomes And Learner Satisfaction." Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks (2009): 1 - 16.
Singh, Shewta, Rylander, David H, Mims, Tina C. "Efficoency of Online vs Offline Learning: A Comparrision of Inputs and Outcomes." International Journal of Business, Humanities and Technology (2012): 1 - 7.
Soto, Carlos. Course Advisor . n.d. 18 March 2013. <http://resources.courseadvisor.com/online-learning/online-degree-cost>.
Spaulding, Michael. "Perceptions of Academic Honesty of Online vs. Face-to-Face Classrooms." Journal of Interactive Online Learning (2009): 1 - 17.
Academic Dishonesty is an epidemic that stems from primary school up through Ph.D. courses. A survey done in 2006 showed 56% of graduate business students had cheated compared to 47% of graduate non-business students (Spaulding). A logical question that would arise is: would the lack of face to face accountability call into question a student’s ethical behavior? Would a student lacking traditional classroom supervision take advantage of an online environment and cheat?
Accountability is defined as the responsibility for conducting activities in a certain way or producing certain results (Anderman). If it is already known that cheating in a traditional setting is a serious problem then, when there is a setting where here is no physical accountability, would people take the easy road more often? Michael Spaulding’s researched looked at two situations: actual academic dishonesty and others perception of cheating.
“Perceptions are derived from a process through which our brain organizes and interprets what happens in one’s environment. Perceptions are influenced by past experiences, memories, expectations, suggestions, and context in which any given experience occurs” (Spaulding). He then goes on to contend that perceptions are an important aspect of this study of honesty because “perceptions provide a valuable reflection of the beliefs that individuals hold, in this case perceptions about academic dishonesty” (Spaulding). His findings were that any actual cheating was not increased in the online setting. However, he did find that students perceived that there was more academic dishonesty in other students, with no admittance to cheating themselves.
Students will have to live with the choices they make during their academic career. The code of conduct for each school is different, but every accredited center of learning does have a policy against cheating. From looking off a fellow student’s paper to plagiarism, none is tolerated in any legitimate institution. Spaulding surveyed a group of 103 students, and only nineteen had substantial knowledge of the university’s academic integrity policy located in the course syllabus (Spaulding).
The cost is another concern of students. Students come from all walks of life. Some have parents who can pay tuition. Many rely on scholarships and government financial aid to pay for school. When it comes to cost effectiveness, there is no difference (Soto). Carlos Soto, a contributing writer for Course Advisor, an education matching website, reminds us that online classes do save money from the aspect of never having to leave home.
If you take traditional classes, students must leave their home. The online student does not need to pay for transportation such as a personal vehicle, or public transportation. If driving to campus there are fuel and parking fees associated. Food can be prepared and eaten at home instead of purchased in the school. Students who live at home do not have to worry about room and boarding expenses. However, offline learning has its own costs.. Their online counterpart may include software fees, eBooks, and additional technology fees the school may charge (Soto).
Soto does make mention of a fact that is important when it comes to considering school cost can play a major factor. “If a school’s cost and process for earning your diploma seems to good to be true- they probably are”. There are schools out there that are scams to profit themselves and not the students. The U.S. Department of Education has a list of institutions that are accredited. This list is useful when determining whether or not an online program is valid (Soto).
The measurable outcomes are what drive education: grades, test scores, and overall performance. Teachers, students, and schools alike are regarded in light of scores. Marks determine funding, salaries, classes, placements, admission to different departments or schools. Without good scores, teachers lose jobs, schools get denied funding, and students have to repeat classes, or will not be admitted into programs desired.
The question that comes about with online programs is performance. Just as with honesty, the student is left to their own devices when it comes to their schooling. Do students work as hard when it comes to online classes? Do they complete the required course work? In the past there has not been any conclusive evidence to support one or the other (Singh).
In 2012 Shweta Singh, David Rlander, and Tina Mims of Texas Women’s University began research into this very issue. They set out to discover any difference when it comes to performance. “Performance tends to indicate a grade achieved by the student irrespective of whether student performance is a course grade or an item grade” (Singh).
With online classes students become the “management decision makers of their education. This was an unprecedented way of considering how to evaluate a student” (Singh). Also the “inputs” are how they determine active performance in class. That would be time spent studying, posting to online discussion forums, and the like.
The research followed a Consumer Behavior Class. One was entirely online, and one offline. Both had the same instructor, and were conducted in the same time period. The online had forty-four students, and the traditional class only twenty-six. At the end of the term data was collected on satisfaction, perceived level of learning, effort, and other characteristics (Singh).
Effort was the first criteria looked at. This looked at the exact number of hours students spent studying for the class each week. Students spending three to four hours a week studying for the class offline were 65%, and online were 46%. The one to two hour range was 23% of classroom students and 34% of online students. Finally, the effort of students who spend five hours or more studying for this class offline were 12% and online were 21% (Singh). The study shows that classroom students would spend less time outside of class studying. However, is that due to lack of work, or efficiency?
Efficiency was determined by “students who produce the highest possible outputs with given amounts of inputs” (Singh). The classroom students were found to be 38% efficient. Their online peers were coming in at a 56% efficiency rate. Online were found to be more efficient than traditional classroom students (Singh).
Grades are the bottom line. That is what is looked at as the big factor. 78% was the average score for the online class. The classrooms average score was 70%. Online students outperformed the traditional classroom students by 8% (Singh).
Satisfaction is a key aspect with learning. Did the student feel confident in the class? Was the class enjoyable? Did they begrudgingly muscle through a learning environment that was not satisfactory? Using a seven point scale they asked students to rank their satisfaction with the class. The online average rank was 6.15, while offline was 5.90 (Singh). Students rated that they were more satisfied with the online learning than the traditional classroom.
If we are to continue with the definition given by the researchers, that performance is to indicate the grade received by the student, across the board online came out on top. The data suggests that online learning is superior in productivity, efficiency, satisfaction, and grades.
Again, past studies found to be inconclusive showing a form of superiority. This study seems to show that online would be the better of the two. It is important to note that this is only plausible for some. Familiarity with the internet and computers would be important. An individual without a good working knowledge of the internet would find online courses to be much more difficult. Also, different learning styles make a real impact on education as well. If the student learns best in a peer group setting than the online environment would not be the best for them.
The colleges are not the only ones to work with online learning. Online learning is a growing trend in many primary and secondary schools around the world. Cyber Home Learning System(CHLS) and Cyber Home Learning Video Conferencing(CHLS-VC) are self-regulated for primary school learning (Lim).
It is not very common to find primary students working in this capacity. This is a growing trend in foreign countries, but still very few and far between. This helps with the cost of private education. It is also hoped to solve some foreign counties tension between economic classes. CHLS allows students access to education in rural and remote areas where they might not normally have it (Lim).
It is important to note that some fields of study are not possible to study in a removed online environment. In an interview with a nursing instructor at Fortis College, Kay Friedly, she stated “you cannot teach that(nursing) via a machine.” She went on to say that instructors “must be able to evaluate not only technical skills, but social skills and moral integrity. You cannot glean that through a computer.”
Friedly stated that there are certain “psycho-motor skills” that need to be developed through working in a hands-on environment. Moving a mouse and typing would not be sufficient for developing such skills in nursing. “There is a level of responsibility when you look eye to eye with a human being that you have to perform a procedure on, which cannot be attained through an online class”. To become a certified nurse one must become board certified. The instructor must believe that the student has the moral integrity to perform their duties and communicate that fact to the board of nursing. Friedly does not believe it would be possible to give such credence without ever working in a classroom with the student (Friedly).
I also spoke with a student named Victoria Johnson. She is completing her bachelors of arts at the University of Central Florida, and has taken both online and traditional classes in her college career. She felt it was better to take classes in the classroom. “The classroom makes it harder to procrastinate”, said Johnson. Johnson mentioned multiple times about the “responsibility” and “accountability” of being in that face to face environment.
Johnson believed she gained more from a classroom than her experience with online classes. “The interaction of the classroom is what made the difference. A professor might use a power point, and you would have to write notes. You do not get that from online. All an online class is, is reading.” She believed that the classroom was much more engaging that the online. She engaged visual, audial, and verbal learning styles in the classroom. On the other hand in the online courses it was primarily reading material from the computer.
I explained to Johnson the findings from the research found in the Efficiency of Offline vs. Online Learning. She was surprised to learn of the online results. She believed that more research would need to be conducted to truly know the truth. She suggested different groups, learning materials, or even instructors would have made a difference.
Johnson feels the biggest drawback to online learning is the communication. Johnson believes that the immediate interaction in the classroom with the instructor is far superior to having the set up an appointment to speak with them in person, or waiting on email correspondence.
On the subject of academic honesty Johnson believes that it is much easier to be dishonest in the disconnected land of cyberspace. “It is easy to use notes, or books on a test. Even pull up a Google search to find the answer,” commented Johnson. She mentioned the lack of someone’s physical eyes watching invokes less integrity in the individual student (Johnson). Johnson’s thoughts lined up with the findings of Michael Spaulding. In which students tend to believe more academic dishonesty in their fellow students than in themselves (Spaulding).
In this, the information age, computers have become the main source of entertainment, and learning. The numbers say that online learning is the way of the future. The statistics show that it is superior across the board to traditional classroom learning (Singh). However, students and instructors alike are not convinced. Some question the legitimacy of the schools (Soto). Others focus more concern on student integrity in the disconnected online environment (Spaulding). More research into this matter will need to make conclusive claims as to a superior method of education. One thing remains certain: education is evolving.
Works Cited
Anderman, Eric M., Anderman, Linly Hicks. Psychology of Classroom Learning: An Encyclopedia. Detroit: Psychology of classroom learning [electronic resource] : an encyclopedia / Eric M. Anderman, editor-in-chief ; Lynley H. Anderman, co-editor, 2009.
Angiello, Roanne. "Study Looks at Online Learning Vs Traditional Instruction." Education Diguest 2010: 1.
Friedly, Kay. Insrturctor. Michael Shannon. March 2013.
Johnson, Victoria. Student. Michael Shannon. March 2013.
Lim, Doo Hun, Morris, Michael L, Kurpritz, Virginia W. "Online Vs Blended Learning: Differences in INstructional Outcomes And Learner Satisfaction." Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks (2009): 1 - 16.
Singh, Shewta, Rylander, David H, Mims, Tina C. "Efficoency of Online vs Offline Learning: A Comparrision of Inputs and Outcomes." International Journal of Business, Humanities and Technology (2012): 1 - 7.
Soto, Carlos. Course Advisor . n.d. 18 March 2013. <http://resources.courseadvisor.com/online-learning/online-degree-cost>.
Spaulding, Michael. "Perceptions of Academic Honesty of Online vs. Face-to-Face Classrooms." Journal of Interactive Online Learning (2009): 1 - 17.
The why of the paper
This topic spoke to me on a personal level. For the 2012-2013 school year I have been participating in the Distance Learning Program. I have been in Orlando, Florida since September, 2012. I found online classes to be much more difficult than the classes I had taken in the spring, and summer on the SCC campus. I found the disconnected learning environment frustrating. Moreover, discussion post became the bane of my existence. I was sure that it was far less superior to the traditional learning setting of the classroom. When I began my research it would be easy to say I was biased. I saw online as a poor choice for gaining ones education. Through the research I found this to be a user issue, rather than the learning venue.