Student Perceptions of Online Learning: A Comparison of Two Different Populations

1. Student Perceptions of Online Learning: A Comparison of Two Different Populations Kitty Daniels and Susan Feather PACE UNIVERSITY New York, NY ISECON (San Antonio, TX) November 1, 2002

2. Topics to Be Covered • Background • Two Populations • Purpose of the Study • Methodology • Preliminary Findings • Future Directions ISECON (San Antonio, TX) November 1, 2002

3. Background • Increased demand to implement distance learning • Potential declining enrollments • Pace’s multi-campus environment ISECON (San Antonio, TX) November 1, 2002

4. Characteristics of the Successful Online Learner • Motivated and self directed • Needs support services • Requires social context for learning—a learning community ISECON (San Antonio, TX) November 1, 2002

5. Two Populations • Two-year degree asynchronous, online learners • Four-year degree traditional face-to-face learners ISECON (San Antonio, TX) November 1, 2002

6. Purpose of the Study • How do perceptions of online learning differ between two populations? • Pilot for intended longitudinal study ISECON (San Antonio, TX) November 1, 2002

7. Methodology • Development of pre- and post-course survey (15 questions) • Demographics (4 questions) • Age • Gender • Educational characteristics • Employment status ISECON (San Antonio, TX) November 1, 2002

8. Methodology (cont’d.) • Student perceptions (11 questions) • Amount of time spent in course study • Level of performance • Opportunity to interact with others • Effectiveness of technology for communication • Depth/breadth of content coverage • Satisfaction with independent course work • Open-ended questions ISECON (San Antonio, TX) November 1, 2002

9. Face-to-face Group Traditional full-time students Work 20 hrs or less per week No prior online courses Online Group Adult learners Full-time employees, part-time students Prior online courses Student Demographics ISECON (San Antonio, TX) November 1, 2002

10. Face-to-face Group Online Format Approx. ¾ had high expectations Traditional Classroom Format Almost ALL expected they would do well Online Group Online Format All had high expectations Traditional Classroom Format Fewer expected to do well Expected Level of PerformanceOnline vs. Traditional Classroom Format ISECON (San Antonio, TX) November 1, 2002

11. Face-to-face Group Online Format Slightly over ¾ felt they had done well Traditional Classroom Format A higher percentage of students felt they would have done well Online Group Online Format Number diminished considerably when compared to pre-course Traditional Classroom Format Fewer students felt they would have done well Expected Level of PerformanceOnline vs. Traditional Classroom Format ISECON (San Antonio, TX) November 1, 2002

12. Face-to-face Group Only half felt there would be adequate opportunity to interact Online Group Over ¾ of group felt there would be sufficient opportunity to interact Opportunity to Interact with Instructors and Other Students ISECON (San Antonio, TX) November 1, 2002

13. Face-to-face Group Only ¼ of students felt there had been ample amount of interactivity Online Group Just under ¾ of group felt there had been adequate opportunity Opportunity to Interact with Instructors and Other Students ISECON (San Antonio, TX) November 1, 2002

14. Effectiveness of Technology for Online Communication • Pre-course: • Majority of both groups felt technology would be effective • Post-course: • Percentages declined somewhat ISECON (San Antonio, TX) November 1, 2002

15. Depth and Breadth of Content Coverage • Pre-course: • Majority of students (both groups) felt the material would be covered with as much depth and breadth as traditional course • Post-course: • Fewer face-to-face students felt the course covered as much with as much depth ISECON (San Antonio, TX) November 1, 2002

16. Student Satisfaction with Independent Course Work • Majority of both groups responded they enjoyed independent work before and at end of course ISECON (San Antonio, TX) November 1, 2002

17. Student Comments • You can access the class at your convenience and your class is wherever your computer is. • I can study for this class on my own time and not have to worry about going to class. • I think I will be able to enjoy the new experience of doing an online course for the first time. • I have never taken an online course before, so I am excited about all aspects of it. ISECON (San Antonio, TX) November 1, 2002

18. Student Comments (cont’d.) • The main drawbacks of taking an online class include the absence of personal interaction with fellow classmates and actual instruction from the professor. • The thing I would enjoy the least is there would be a lot of extensive reading compared to an in-class session. You have to be independent and know how to pace your own time to complete all the assignments. ISECON (San Antonio, TX) November 1, 2002

19. Preliminary Conclusions • Face-to-face students were less confident in their ability to succeed in an online format perceiving that they would do better in traditional classroom • Online students had high expectations for success compared to face-to-face group, yet this diminished by the end of course ISECON (San Antonio, TX) November 1, 2002

20. Preliminary Conclusions (cont’d.) • Face-to-face students expected and found considerably less opportunity to interact with one another online than online group ISECON (San Antonio, TX) November 1, 2002

21. Preliminary Conclusions (cont’d.) • A majority of both groups felt that online course would cover material with as much breadth/depth as traditional course • Face-to-face group felt less strongly after the course ISECON (San Antonio, TX) November 1, 2002

22. Future Directions • Acknowledge that “one size doesn’t fit all,” although online delivery offers opportunities • Recommend orientation to online course delivery, perhaps, more critical w/younger learner • Edit/refine survey instrument • Study groups over time ISECON (San Antonio, TX) November 1, 2002

23. Questions? ISECON (San Antonio, TX) November 1, 2002