Distance Education - Lit Review

Major Jeffrey J. Scott

This paper was completed and submitted in partial fulfillment of the Master Teacher Program, a two-year
faculty professional development program conducted by the Center for Teaching Excellence, United
States Military Academy, West Point, NY, 2012.
Background
st

As we push deeper into the 21 century, new technologies continue to be developed that allow for easier
public access to distance education. Todays increasingly sophisticated technological discoveries allow
for distance education programs to expand at an ever-increasing rate (Weinstein, 1997). Some would
argue that these new technological improvements, coupled with advancements in the schools
understanding, curriculum design, and experience with distance education, make distance educations
effectiveness equal to or better than the traditional face-to-face classroom (Sonner, 1999). On the
contrary, there are others that believe that no matter how sophisticated the distance education program
becomes, that there will never be a replacement for the interaction that one receives from teachers and
fellow students alike in a tradition brick and mortar classroom setting (Abrahamson, 1998). Effectiveness
is often measured by student performance, that is, how well the students learn and apply the course
material. Student performance is most commonly measured by testing. Also, effectiveness must be
considered in terms of the students perceptions and their satisfaction with the program.

Distance education is not a new development. According to Sherry (1995), it has existed for more than a
century and has its beginnings in European correspondence courses. It is a field of education that allows
for students to participate in classes while never setting foot inside of a classroom. Today, distance
education is a broad term that refers to several styles of education. Under the umbrella of distance
education there are two distinct groups, synchronous and asynchronous education. Synchronous
education refers to a mode of delivery that allows all class participants to be present simultaneously
through a communications network. Common types of synchronous deliveries are the telephone, web
conferencing, and video conferencing. Asynchronous distance education refers to a mode of delivery that
does not allow for the class participants to communicate in real time, but which allows for greater

individual flexibility regarding when the course content is accessed. Some modes of asynchronous
delivery tend to be unsophisticated such as standard mail, communications through fax, and video and
audio delivery via CD, DVD, or VHS. More advanced asynchronous methods of delivery include email
and internet based message boards.

Distance education is appealing to schools for myriad reasons, to include the fact that it can be a lucrative
investment. Schools can attract more business because it allows for more students to take classes.
Also, it allows for students from outside of the geographic footprint to enroll in classes that they otherwise
would not feasibly be able to do. Distance education entails much less financial overhead and
infrastructure from the school. It has become so successful that a tremendous variety of schools strictly
offer classes through distance education.

Distance education also offers appealing opportunities for the student. Flexibility of schedule, especially
when considering asynchronous distance education, is one of the most desirable characteristics of this
type of education. It allows for students to access class when and where it is most appropriate for them,
and therefore, it offers the opportunity to balance lifes demands of family, work, and the countless other
competing requirements. Other desirable characteristics for the student include time and financial
savings from the commute to class, the potential increase of class seats, and a general opportunity for
people to get an education that otherwise maybe would not.

Educators believe there are several shortfalls that prevent it from being as successful as classes
delivered in the traditional classroom. They believe that students learn best through the direct face-toface interaction provided by the traditional classroom. Studies have shown that students have more
enjoyment and prefer the individualized instructor feedback provided in a traditional school (Abrahamson,
1998). Also, students must have access to certain technologies, oftentimes that includes the internet and
a personal computer, and those technologies can make distance education expensive. Students must
also have some level of technological skills to properly participate in a todays distance education classes
that depend on continued advancements in technology. Also, there is a concern that some proprietary

schools are merely just diploma mills, more concerned with their bottom line than with the quality of the
institutions education. Appropriate accreditation and the standards of certain distance education
programs have come into question in the past.

Review of Literature
There is a real argument between academics regarding the effectiveness of distance education, and I
have identified 10 peer-reviewed journal articles for this review. Five articles support the argument that
distance education is as effective as the traditional classroom education, and five support the argument
that the traditional classroom is the superior form of education. I will identify the main points of each
citation and will keep that organized by argument.

Articles that support the effectiveness of the traditional classroom

The articles titled Distance Learning in an Accounting Principles Course- Student Satisfaction and
Perceptions of Efficacy (Vamosi, Pierce, and Slotkin, 2004), The Impact of Online Teaching on Faculty
Load: Computing the Ideal Class Size for Online Courses (Tomei, 2006), Delivering Graduate Marketing
Education: An Analysis of Face-to-face versus Distance Education (Ponzurick, France, and Logar,
2000), On-Line Education in a Management Science Course- Effectiveness and Performance Factors
(Dellana, Collins, and West, 2000), and Student Perceptions of Online Versus On Campus Instruction
(Beard and Harper, 2004) support the effectiveness of the traditional classroom.

These five articles all have similar topics. The general topic is the effectiveness of various distance
education programs versus the typical brick and mortar classroom. Three articles based their findings on
student perceptions and class size, respectively. Beard et. al. (2004) focus on student perceptions of the
two types of education before and after course completion, Vamosi et. al. (2004) focus on student
perceptions of efficacy comparing the two education styles, and Tomei (2006) focuses on class size when
comparing the effectiveness.

The research hypotheses try to determine: 1. Is the effectiveness of distance education equivalent to that
of traditional education? 2. What is the relative efficacy of a distance learning delivery? 3. What is the
ideal class size in distance education? All five articles ask, is distance education as effective as the
traditional classroom?

The samples were all taken from students that make up the respective distance education and traditional
classes. The sample sizes are not large in some cases, ranging from only 22 students to 221 students,
and in one study the number of participants is not even provided.

Data collection were similar in all five studies. Data were collected from the students within the class and
taken from their test scores and from surveys. Surveys were at a minimum conducted at the conclusion
of the semester and in most instances were conducted in the beginning, as well. In the research
conducted by Ponzurick et. al. (2000) surveys were administered and completed at the end of each
class. In Tomeis (2006) research, not all students participated in the surveys for unidentified reasons.
The study conducted by Vamosi et. al. (2004) was set up with two populations of students both taking the
same class. One population initially took the class via the classroom and then rotated to a
classroom/distance education setting, and then finally into a strictly distance education delivery. The
second population did the same thing, but in reverse order. Tomei (2006) measured the number of hours
that the teacher spent advising his students, both in the traditional classroom compared to his distance
education group.

Vamosi et. al. (2004) classified his students attitudes and perceptions with five categories and asked the
students eight questions based on their attitudes and perceptions. Tomei (2006) developed several
charts that highlighted the amount of time versus class size that the teacher dedicated to his students.
Beard et. al. (2004) designed a survey to measure students perception with a scale of five categories and
with ten questions and this study also included open-ended questions. Ponzurick et. al (2000) utilized
several surveys to capture students perceptions of their face-to-face class as compared to their distance
education class. Dellana et. al. (2000) measured student performance through GPA comparison between

the two populations, one enrolled in the traditional classroom and the second enrolled in distance
education.

Survey responses from Dellana et. al. (2000), Ponzurick et. al. (2000), and Vamosi et. al (2004) were
measured on a 7-point Likert-type scale to allow for statistical comparison between each question.
Student attendance was also category that was measured for statistical comparison.

Test scores were analyzed and statistically compared for students taking the distance education course
versus students taking the same course in the traditional classroom setting. Scores were also analyzed
for those students that began the semester in one course delivery and that switched to the other course
delivery to see if there was statistical difference. Tomei (2006) statistically compared teacher hours
dedicated to advising students between the two delivery styles.

The survey findings all demonstrated a student shared preference to traditional classroom study over
distance education; however there was no significant difference between the grades between the two
delivery styles. Vamosi et. al. (2004) found the data revealed that student satisfaction with the distant
learning portion of the course was significantly lower than that regarding the traditional classroom for
many of the course attributes to include (a) the interest level associated with course content, (b) the ease
of learning the course material, and (c) the effectiveness in learning the course material. In all three
instances, the distance learning component received significantly lower satisfaction ratings than did its
counterpart. Tomei (2006) discovered that, overall, approximately 14% more hours were required to
teach the same number of students online for distance learning than in the traditional classroom. Beard
et. al. (2004) discovered that there were concerns from the distance education students concerning
hardware and software, and that they would take another similar course, but prefer the interaction with
the instructor that the traditional classroom offers. Ponzurick et. al (2000) found that only 10 of 138 said
they preferred distance learning. Forty-three responded that they like the student/teacher interaction
offered in a traditional classroom.

Collectively the five studies suggest student preference towards the traditional classroom. The biggest
factor in common with these five articles is the student preference for the student/teacher interaction that
is offered in the traditional classroom. It is important to note that the studies found no significant
difference between student grades with these two delivery styles.

Articles that support the argument that distance education is as effective as classroom education
The articles titled Success in the Capstone Business Course- Assessing the Effectiveness of Distance
Learning (Sonner, 1999), Comparing the Success of Students Enrolled in Distance
Education Courses vs. FacetoFace Classrooms (Swan and Jackman, 2000), On-line Instruction: Are
the Outcomes the Same? (Warren and Holloman Jr., 2005), Making a Choice: The Perceptions and
Attitudes of Online Graduate Students (Braun, 2008), and Student Ratings of Instruction in Distance
Learning and On-Campus Classes (Spooner, Jordan, Algozzine, Spooner, 1999) support the argument
that distance education is as effective as classroom education.

The topics are similar for these five articles. They each compare the effectiveness of distance education
versus the traditional face-to-face classroom. Each study wants to ascertain if there are student
achievement and perception differences between the two types of education. In all, there are two general
hypotheses. 1. Are students achieving the same grades, based on GPA, when comparing those taking
the same class in the traditional classroom to those taking it through distance education? 2. Do students
rate their experience with distance learning as comparable to traditional classroom learning?

The samples were taken from the students enrolled in the classes in the traditional classroom and those
taking the same classes through distance education. Two studies utilized college undergraduates to
include Sonner (1999) using 85 students and Braun (2008) using 90 students. Swan et. al. (2000) has a
sample of 623 secondary education students and Warren et. al. (2005) and Spooner et. al. (1999) utilized
52 and 123 graduate students, respectively.

With the exception of Braun (2008), data were collected from student assignments to include quizzes and
exams and statistically analyzed. All studies conducted surveys in order to measure student perception
and the close-ended survey questions were statistically analyzed. Sonner (1999) studied both samples
through a series of business courses and measured mean GPAs between both samples at the
completion of their final business course, the capstone class. Warren et. al. (2005) had the students, to
include the distance education and traditional classroom populations, make a portfolio that consisted of
their professional webpage design, a professional mission statement that included their goals, interviews,
a PowerPoint presentation, a research paper, article critiques, and midterm and final examinations. The
portfolios were assessed and analyzed by three outside evaluations for their overall quality.

Swan et. al. (2000) compared mean GPA of the two samples in order to ensure that one historically did
not receive better grades prior to the introduction of distance education.
Warren et. al. (2005) pre-assessed the students at the beginning of the course and post-assessed at the
end of the course in a self evaluation that examined their level of expertise in the course's competencies
and objectives. This self-evaluation was conducted using a 7-point Likert-type scale. Braun (2008) also
surveyed students utilizing a 7-point Likert-type scale. His survey contained 26 questions, however, the
last two questions were open-ended responses. Spooner et. al. (1999) chose to use a 5-point Likert-type
scale to measure student responses.

Sonner (1999) found that students who had earned credit in at least one distance learning class had a
significantly higher average in the capstone class than those students who only took traditional classes.
The research identified significant positive correlation between the number of distance learning courses
the students had completed and their final class average.

Research by Swan et. al. (2000) demonstrated that instruction by distance education resulted in no
differences in GPA for students when compared to students in the traditional classroom. The data
generated and analyzed by Warren et. al. (2005) indicated that there was no significant difference
between the face-to-face portion and the distance education portion. Also, results of the course

evaluations administered by the university reveal no significant difference in student satisfaction between
the two portions. Braun (2008) found that students preferred distance education. They enjoyed the
flexibility that it provided because it allowed them to balance school, career, and caring for their families.
The students believed they benefited from the distance education courses and that they would
recommend the style and take similar classes again. Spooner et. al. (1999) found that no statistical
difference were evident in student overall ratings of the two delivery styles. Student perceptions of the
classes were statistically similar, and their ratings of the instruction and the communications were
equivalent.

In conclusion, there was no evidence that traditional face-to-face instruction was more effective than
distance education. All of the studies demonstrated that the student GPAs were either equal to or higher
in the distance education courses when compared to their traditional classroom counterparts. Also,
student perception reflected satisfaction levels equal to or above that of the traditional classroom.

The comparison of both sets of articles

All articles focus their research on comparing student achievement, measured by student GPAs, and
student perceptions between distance education and the traditional classroom. These findings support
the notion that there is an argument between scholars regarding the effectiveness of distance education.

Critique of Research
There are several similar strengths within both sets of articles; those that promote the effectiveness of the
traditional classroom, and those that promote the effectiveness of distance education. I believe that it is
better to study one sample population that attends courses, through both the traditional and distance
formats, and compare how they performed, versus, using two distinct samples that attend courses in one
format as opposed to the other. I believe that this methodology, called dual delivery in some studies,
provides the researcher with more consistent findings. Vamosi et. al. (2004), Beard et. al. (2004),
Ponzurick et. al. (2000), and Warren et. al. (2005) all chose to incorporate this methodology in their
studies. Spooner et. al. (1999), Sonner (1999), Ponzurick et. al. (2000) also chose to study a sample of

students that attended classes utilizing both formats, over multiple semesters, to demonstrate a
relationship between performance, within the same sample, with regard to each respective mode of
delivery.

I believe that sample size can be a good determinant in recognizing the breadth of a study. Generally, a
larger sample size will minimize the effects of individual outliers that are far to the left or the right of the
median population. Swan et. al. (2000) and Sonner (1999) each had large sample populations. Several
studies samples were not as large as Id like to see. I believe that when a sample is too small, the
researcher gets less consistent and reflective results. Tomei (2006) utilized only eleven students per
instruction method, for a total of only twenty-two students. Beard et. al. (2004) only received responses
from twenty-five of the original forty-two students. Spooner et. al. (1999) had a disproportionally small
sample of men (eight) versus women (forty-two) which wouldnt be consistent with an average population
of students. Finally, Vamosi et. al. (2004) failed to have a clear identification of the sample sizes studied.

I recognized other problems with sample populations as well. Spooner et. al. (1999) researched
numerous classes instead of focusing on only one class for each method of delivery. In general, this
technique can be a strength, however in this case, it diluted the original sample population and allowed
for only four or six students in a particular class that was studied. Swan et. al. (2000) had too broad of a
sample population for a strong analysis of the data. Swan et. al. (2000) collected data and consolidated it
from samples in nine subjects spanning all four high school grades. It isnt a preferable to consolidate a
sample population that broad. This expansive sample, and accompanying data collection, then drove the
study to make five broad conclusions that were not initially identified as research questions or
hypotheses. I feel that Sonners (1999) sample was too broad and encompassing as well. Sonner (1999)
studied eighty-seven students taking classes in three uniquely different types of distance education, to
include a television class, a correspondence class, and a self-study. The biggest concern I have with the
sample and methodology is how Sonner (1999) chose to take the findings from each class and then
consolidate the sample together to analyze the data at the end.

I identified further sample weaknesses as well. Braun (2008) did not randomly assign any part of the
sample, and Vamosi et. al. (2004) does not provide background information regarding the sample to
include size, sex, or background. Lastly, Tomei (2006) did not take into account that only 18% of his
sample had previously had experience with distance education, and that this could negatively influence
student perception.

Beard et. al. (2004), Ponzurick et. al. (2000), and Braun (2008) allowed for open-ended questions in their
surveys and during interviews. Open-ended questions allow for the researchers to get clear information
regarding their samples perceptions. Also, these teams of researchers effectively incorporated Likerttype scales for survey questions. Dellana et. al. (2000) analyzed open-ended questions as well, and
effectively analyzed student perceptions gleaned from the questions with regard to their GPAs. Whereas
Warren et. al. (2005) only utilized close-ended questions, and in this study I see that as a shortfall.

Article strengths also included the thorough statistical analysis of Vamosi et. al. (2004), a clear and logical
analysis and interpretation by Braun (2008), and the internal consistency estimates conducted by
Spooner et. al. (1999). Tomei (2006) clearly identified the questions and hypothesis at the beginning of
the article and Warren et. al. (2005) smartly utilized outside evaluators for the overall assessment of the
students course work and surveys, in an attempt to provide a less biased analysis. I think it was logical
and effective for Dellana et. al. (2000) to research students that took both their distance education and
traditional courses from the same instructor. The same instructor teaching for each mode of delivery
should eliminate bias that two different teachers would inevitably have. Sonner (1999) clearly identified
that his research was done from one small south-eastern university and that his results may not be
representative of other universities.

Weaknesses within the articles included the fact that Ponzurick et. al. (2000) only focused on student
grades as compared to course mode of delivery, and therefore, they failed to take into account student
perceptions. Also, Ponzurick et. al. (2000) based their findings on the grades that students received in
classes utilizing three different teachers. If the study could be accomplished with only one teacher

10

teaching each class sequentially, there would be less room for bias in the findings. Beard et. al (2004)
studied students perceptions regarding distance education, however, it was the first time that the majority
of the students took a distance education course utilizing the internet. Therefore, many students had
frustrations with website navigation that more experienced internet using students may not have. Braun
(2008) failed to use analysis to determine reliability. Sonners (1999) study had a large enough sample
only because it was conducted over several semesters. I believe with that longevity, students
perceptions could have dramatically changed over the years based on delivery mode experience and
their overall familiarity with it.

I identified two weaknesses in the Dellana et. al. (2000) study, to include the distance education sample
size was more than twice the size of their traditional classroom sample. Also, Dellana et. al. (2000)
considered a course that split its delivery between distance education and the traditional classroom, as a
completely distance education class for the purposes of their study. I believe the naming convention for
their class delivery was a bit deceptive.

Position Statement
I chose ten articles to conduct the best practices literature review between the effectiveness of the
traditional classroom and distance education modes of delivery. Five supported the argument that the
traditional classroom delivery mode is as effective as or better than similar courses provided through
distance education delivery, and five supported the opposing argument. My belief, based solely on the
articles identified and reviewed, is that the research and subsequent journal articles supporting the
effectiveness of distance education were overall the more convincing set of articles. Therefore, I would
state that distance education is as effective as, or better than, the traditional classroom and is the best
practice.

The articles supporting distance education had better samples overall. They were on average, larger and
I believe more representative of like courses, whereas the traditional classroom samples were smaller
and more channeled to the specific class. Also, sample responses were, in some cases, inferior in the

11

traditional classroom. Beard et. al. (2004) only had twenty-five of the original forty-two respond. If that
large number of non-responders did respond, the potential exists for completely different findings.

I did identify strengths and weaknesses in the articles, but I would argue, based on the overall quality of
the research, that the conclusions based on the findings, are the most significant piece of criteria in
determining the best practice. The conclusions of all of those representing the traditional classroom
argument, including Beard et. al. (2004), Dellana et. al (2000), Ponzurick et. al. (2000), Tomei (2006), and
Vamosi et. al. (2004), identified a general student preference for the traditional classrooms teacher to
student interactions, but failed to identify any performance advantage for those students in the traditional
classroom.

Distance education does provide flexibility and one researcher did find a performance advantage for
distance education students. The researchers representing the distance education argument, including
Braun (2008), Sonner (1999), Spooner et. al. (1999), Swan et. al. (2000), and Warren et. al (2005) all
identified student preference for the greater flexibility that distance education provided, and one study did
identify a performance advantage. Sonner (1999) found that students did as well or better in the
capstone exercise if they took the at least one previous class through the distance education format. The
research identified significant positive correlation between the number of distance learning courses the
students had completed and their final class average.

In my opinion, distance education programs have proven that they can provide the student with a quality
education. Distance education is here to stay and I predict that it will continue to grow and mature as new
technologies develop that allow for more fluid and interactive distance education opportunities. I believe
that distance education will never supplant the classroom, but nevertheless, it should be embraced as it
can provide a unique opportunity for students to attend class that would not have otherwise had the
chance.
References

12

Abrahamson, C. (1998). Issues in interactive communication in distance education. College Student

Journal, 32(1), 33-43.
Sherry, L. (1995). Issues in Distance Learning. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications,
1(4), 337-365.
Weinstein, P. (1997). Education Goes the Distance. Technology and Learning, 17(8), 24-25.

Annotated Readings
Beard, L., & Harper, C. (2004). Student Perceptions of Online Versus On Campus Instruction. Education,
122(4), 658-663.
This research indicated that students and instructors expressed concern about the lack of instructor to
student interaction and the inability for the entire class to interact together. Some students also had
hardware and software concerns. Many students said that they would take another internet based course
but that they preferred the face-to-face interaction with instructors.
Braun, T. (2008). Making a Choice: The Perceptions and Attitudes of Online Graduate Students. Journal
of Technology and Teacher Education, 16(1), 63-92.
Through a series of surveys, this study found that students desire for flexibility outweighed their apparent
need for instructor and peer interaction in a traditional classroom. Those students surveyed also reported
overall satisfaction with the online academic course content and instruction when compared to traditional
classroom academic course content and instruction.
Dellana, S., Collins, W., & West, D. (2000). On-Line Education in a Management Science CourseEffectiveness and Performance Factors. Journal of Education for Business, 75(5), 43-47.
The findings demonstrate that a course consisting of face-to-face lecture with an on-line portion was just
as effective as the same course that was only offered with the traditional face-to-face lecture. Grade
point averages and classroom attendance were found to be associated with performance in both cases.
Ponzurick, T., France, K., & Logar, C. (2000). Delivering Graduate Marketing Education: An Analysis of
Face-to-face versus Distance Education. Journal of Marketing Education, 22(3), 180-187.
The students, participating in this MBA course, found distance education to be a convenient but less
effective and less satisfying alternative for delivering graduate marketing education in the classroom. The

13

authors caution that course adjustments, to improve both effectiveness and student satisfaction with
distance education, must also consider how these adjustments affect course quality and the learning
experience.
Sonner, B. (1999). Success in the Capstone Business Course- Assessing the Effectiveness of Distance
Learning. Journal of Education for Business, 74(4), 243-47.
This study measured the performance of 85 students taking a capstone business course that were
exposed to traditional classroom instruction and several distance learning techniques. The findings
indicate that distance learning options can be an effective method to deliver information to students.
Certain types of distance learning appeared to be associated with higher grades in the class than the
traditional classroom method.
Spooner, F., Jordan L., Algozzine, B., & Spooner, M. (1999). Student Ratings of Instruction in Distance
Learning and On-Campus Classes. The Journal of Educational Research, 92(3), 132-140.
This study found no differences in course, instructor, teaching, and communication ratings between
distance and traditional classroom delivery modes. The authors believe, that due to the demonstrated
effectiveness of distance learning, that there will be continued growth within this sector of the education
field.
Swan, M., & Jackman, D. (2000). Comparing the Success of Students Enrolled in Distance Education
Courses vs. FacetoFace Classrooms. Journal of Technological Studies, 24(1), 58-63.
This study was primarily interested in comparing student GPAs between traditional classroom and
distance learning delivery techniques. The authors compared the GPAs of students taking identical
courses by means of distance education and the traditional classroom delivery styles. The authors found
no statistical difference in student performance measured by their GPAs.
Tomei, L. (2006). The Impact of Online Teaching on Faculty Load: Computing the Ideal Class Size for
Online Courses. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 14(3), 531-541.
This study demonstrated that distance education demands more of an instructors available time than the
more traditional classroom delivery method. These demands must be considered when allocating the
number of students per course, and schools must understand the implications of larger class sizes with
regard to the effectiveness of teaching.

14

Vamosi, A., Pierce, B., & Slotkin, M. (2004). Distance Learning in an Accounting Principles CourseStudent Satisfaction and Perceptions of Efficacy. Journal of Education for Business, 79(6), 360-366.
Students in this study took a course that had both distance and traditional classroom portions. Students
experienced less satisfaction with the distance learning modes and they found them, as a whole, to be
less interesting and less efficient for learning.
Warren, L. & Holloman, H. Jr. (2005). On-line Instruction: Are the Outcomes the Same? Journal of
Instructional Psychology, 32(2), 148-151.
This study found that there were no significant overall differences between the students that took this
particular course using the on-line distance delivery techniques and of those students that took the course
in the traditional brick and mortar setting. The researchers tested for significant differences between the
two delivery techniques in the areas of student self assessment, course grade distribution, and instructor
overall effectiveness.

15