V OL. 23 / NO.

1 / SPRING 1 1
E-learning in Postsecondary Education
E-learning in Postsecondary Education
Bradford S. Bell and Jessica E. Federman
Summary
Oer t!e "ast decade "ostsecondary education !as #een $oing increasingly %ro$ t!e class-
roo$ to online. &uring t!e %all 2'1' ter$ 31 "ercent o% (.S. college students too) at least
one online course. *!e "ri$ary reasons %or t!e gro+t! o% e-learning in t!e nation,s colleges
and uniersities include t!e desire o% t!ose institutions to generate ne+ reenue strea$s-
i$"roe access- and o%%er students greater sc!eduling %le.i#ility. /et t!e gro+t! o% e-learning
!as #een acco$"anied #y a continuing de#ate a#out its e%%ectieness and #y t!e recognition
t!at a nu$- #er o% #arriers i$"ede its +ides"read ado"tion in !ig!er education.
*!roug! an e.tensie researc! reie+- 0rad%ord 0ell and 1essica 2eder$an e.a$ine t!ree
)ey issues in t!e gro+ing use o% e-learning in "ostsecondary education. *!e %irst is
+!et!er e-learning is as e%%ectie as ot!er deliery $et!ods. *!e de#ate a#out t!e
e%%ectieness o%
e-learning- t!e aut!ors say- !as #een %ra$ed in ter$s o% !o+ it co$"ares +it! ot!er $eans
o% deliering instruction- $ost o%ten traditional instructor-led classroo$ instruction. 0ell and
2eder$an reie+ a nu$#er o% $eta-analyses and ot!er studies t!at- ta)en toget!er- s!o+ t!at
e-learning "roduces outco$es e3uialent to ot!er deliery $edia +!en instructional
conditions are !eld constant. *!e second issue is +!at "articular %eatures o% e-learning
in%luence its e%%ec- tieness. 4ere t!e aut!ors $oe #eyond t!e 5does it +or)6 3uestion to
e.a$ine !o+ di%%erent instructional %eatures and su""orts- suc! as i$$ersion and
interactiity- in%luence t!e e%%ec- tieness o% e-learning "rogra$s. *!ey reie+ researc! t!at
s!o+s !o+ t!ese %eatures can #e con%igured to create e-learning "rogra$s t!at !el" di%%erent
ty"es o% learners ac3uire di%%erent ty"es o% )no+ledge. In addressing t!e t!ird issue7t!e
#arriers to t!e ado"tion o% e-learning in "ostsecondary education70ell and 2eder$an discuss
!o+ concerns a#out %raud and c!eating- uncertainties a#out t!e cost o% e-learning- and t!e
uni3ue c!allenges %aced #y lo+-inco$e and disadantaged students !ae t!e "otential to
under$ine t!e ado"tion o% e-learning instruction.
0ased on t!eir researc! reie+- t!e aut!ors conclude t!at e-learning can #e an e%%ectie
$eans o% deliering "ostsecondary education. *!ey also urge researc!ers to e.a$ine !o+
di%%erent as"ects o% t!ese "rogra$s in%luence t!eir e%%ectieness and to address t!e nu$erous
#arriers to t!e ado"tion o% online instruction in !ig!er education.
www.futureofchildren.org
0rad%ord S. 0ell is an associate "ro%essor o% !u$an resource studies and director o% e.ecutie education in t!e ILR Sc!ool at 8ornell
2 *4E 2(*(RE O2 84IL&REN
(niersity. 1essica E. 2eder$an is a P!.&. student in !u$an resource studies in t!e ILR Sc!ool at 8ornell (niersity.
E-learning in Postsecondary Education
9
V OL. 23 / NO. 1 / SPRING 3 3
lt!oug! $ost student training
and deelo"$ent in (.S. col-
leges and uniersities
continues to ta)e "lace +it!
teac!ers
and students interacting %ace-
to-%ace in traditional classroo$s- t!e "ast
decade !as +itnessed a signi%icant $igra-
tion o% "ostsecondary education %ro$ t!e
classroo$ to online. 9 2'11 0a#son Surey
Researc! Grou" "oll o% $ore t!an 2-:''
c!ie% acade$ic o%%icers %ound t!at ;:
"ercent ie+ online learning as a critical
"art o% t!eir long-ter$ strategy.
1
*!e surey
also reealed t!at $ore t!an ; $illion- or 31
"ercent- o%
t!e nation,s college students too) at least
one online course during t!e %all 2'1'
ter$- an increase o% $ore t!an :;'-'''- or
1'.1 "ercent- oer t!e "reious year.
9lt!oug! t!is %igure is signi%icantly lo+er
t!an t!e
21.1 "ercent annual gro+t! in online enroll-
$ent recorded #y 0a#son in %all 2''<- it %ar
e.ceeds t!e '.; "ercent annual gro+t! in t!e
oerall nu$#er o% !ig!er education students
during t!e sa$e "eriod.
*!e gro+t! o% e-learning in "ostsecondary
education is not li$ited to online courses
and "rogra$s #ut rat!er coers an
e."anding array o% a""lications and
a""roac!es t!at use tec!nology in di%%erent
+ays and to arying degrees. *!ese
a""lications include si$"le ideota"ed
lectures "osted on t!e Internet-
as +ell as learning-$anage$ent syste$s-
suc! as 0lac)#oard- t!at distri#ute content
suc!
as lecture notes- sylla#i- and assign$ents and
%acilitate "eer and student-teac!er
interaction. *!ey also include $ore
so"!isticated online colla#oratie si$ulations
t!at create !ig!- %idelity learning
eniron$ents and interactie e-learning
syste$s t!at use arti%icial intel- ligence to
delier custo$i=ed instruction to students.
2
Interest is also gro+ing in $a)ing
learning accessi#le to students t!roug!
$o#ile deices- suc! as s$art"!ones and
ta#lets.
Bradford S. Bell and Jessica E. Federman
4 *4E 2(*(RE O2 84IL&REN
*!ere are a ariety o% reasons %or t!e gro+t!
o% e-learning in "ostsecondary institutions-
including a need to generate ne+ reenue
strea$s- e."and access- o%%er students greater
sc!eduling %le.i#ility and t!e %reedo$ to
+or) at t!eir o+n "ace- and cur# increas-
ing costs. 9s e-learning !as #een e."anding-
!o+eer- so !ae de#ates a#out its e%%ectie-
ness and concerns a#out its i$"act on t!e
3uality o% !ig!er education. 9ccording to
0a#son- %or e.a$"le- alt!oug! t+o-t!irds
o% t!e acade$ic leaders "olled #eliee t!at
online education is >ust as good as or #etter
t!an %ace-to-%ace instruction- t!e re$aining
one-t!ird #eliee t!e learning outco$es o%
online courses are in%erior to t!ose o% %ace-
to-%ace instruction.
3
9s $ig!t #e e."ected-
leaders at institutions t!at do not o%%er online
courses or "rogra$s tend to #e $ore s)e"ti-
cal. 9 surey o% t!e general "u#lic
conducted #y t!e Pe+ Researc! 8enter
using a nation- ally re"resentatie sa$"le o%
2-1?2 adults %ound t!at only 2< "ercent
#eliee online courses are as alua#le
educationally as courses ta)en in t!e
classroo$.
?
In t!is article +e address t!ree )ey 3uestions
a#out t!e gro+t! o% e-learning in "ostsecond-
ary education. 2irst- is e-learning as e%%ectie
as ot!er deliery $edia@ *!e de#ate a#out
t!e e%%ectieness o% e-learning !as ty"ically
#een %ra$ed in ter$s o% !o+ it co$"ares
+it! ot!er $eans o% deliering instruction-
"articu- larly traditional teac!er-led
classroo$ instruc- tion. *o e.a$ine t!is
3uestion +e reie+ researc! t!at ealuates
t!e e%%ectieness o%
e-learning #y co$"aring learning outco$es
across di%%erent deliery $edia. Second-
+!at %eatures o% e-learning in%luence its
e%%ectie- ness@ E."loring t!is issue re3uires
$oing #eyond t!e 5does it +or)6 3uestion
to a $ore nuanced consideration o% t!e
conditions
under +!ic! e-learning is li)ely to #e $ost
e%%ectie in "ostsecondary settings. *!ird and
V OL. 23 / NO. 1 / SPRING : 5
E-learning in Postsecondary Education
%inally- +!at are t!e #arriers to t!e ado"tion
o% e-learning in !ig!er education@ 0e%ore
addressing t!ese 3uestions- +e de%ine and
descri#e e-learning and reie+ current
trends in !o+ it is #eing used in !ig!er
education.
What Is E-learning?
2or researc!ers- e-learning is a ast and
so$e- +!at disconnected area o% in3uiry t!at
!as attracted interest %ro$ disci"lines as
dierse
as educational "syc!ology- co$"uter science-
in%or$ation science- $anage$ent- co$$uni-
cations- and $ore. *!e #readt! o% t!e su#>ect
and t!e diergent o#>ecties a$ong t!ose
studying e-learning !ae led to a %rag$ented
understanding o% +!at e-learning $eans and
!o+ it s!ould #e de%ined. *!e current state o%
a%%airs is "er!a"s #est illustrated #y t!e $any
ter$s used to re%er to instruction deliered
t!roug! co$"uter tec!nology7e-learning-
online learning- distance learning- distance
education- co$"uter-assisted instruction-
co$"uter-#ased instruction- tec!nology-
#ased instruction- tec!nology-deliered
instruction- co$"uter-#ased si$ulation- and
si$ulation ga$es. In t!eir recent reie+ o% e-
learning researc!- Aennet! 0ro+n- Steen
8!arlier-
and 9#igail Pierotti identi%ied %orty-si.
distinct ter$s.
:
One e."lanation %or t!is
"roli%era-
tion o% ter$s is t!at t!e see$ingly endless
co$#inations and ariants o% tec!nologies
create di%%erent e-learning a""lications +it!
ery di%%erent ca"a#ilities. 9not!er is t!e
constantly eoling nature o% e-learning-
+it! ne+ ter$s acco$"anying t!e
introduction o% ne+ e-learning tec!nologies
or a""lications. 2urt!er co$"licating
$atters- e-learning can #e used eit!er as a
stand-alone deliery tool
or as a su""le$ent to %ace-to-%ace
instruction Bt!e latter co$$only )no+n as
5!y#rid6 or 5#lended6 learningC. 9s Dillia$
0o+en and seeral colleagues suggest-
5Eonline learning, is !ardly one t!ing. It
co$es in a di==ying ariety o% %laors.6
;
*4E 2(*(RE O2 84IL&REN
Bradford S. Bell and Jessica E. Federman
*!e c!allenge %or t!ose see)ing to $a)e
sense o% t!is %ield is t!at t!ese ter$s are
o%ten a""lied inconsistently. 2or
e.a$"le-
t!e ter$s 5e-learning6 and 5online learning6
are %re3uently used to re%er to instruction
in +!ic! $ost Bo%ten F' "ercent or $oreC
o% t!e content is deliered t!roug!
net+or)ed tec!nology Bsuc! as t!e
InternetC- alt!oug! t!e sa$e ter$s !ae
also #een used to
re%er to "rogra$s deliered t!roug! non-
net+or)ed digital tec!nologies B%or
e.a$"le- 8& or &V&C. 2urt!er- so$e
analysts distin- guis! #et+een s"eci%ic
deliery $edia- suc! as 5online learning-6
and #road a""roac!es to instruction- suc!
as 5distance education-6
+!ereas ot!ers use t!ese ter$s interc!ange-
a#ly. Suc! inconsistent use o% ter$s can
$a)e it di%%icult to deter$ine t!e
e3uialency o% courses or "rogra$s e.a$ined
across studies. 9ccordingly- our ie+ is t!at
it $atters less +!at s"eci%ic la#el or ter$
analysts use %or a "articular learning "rogra$
t!an t!at t!ey "roide clear and detailed
in%or$ation a#out t!e tec!nological and
instructional %eatures e$#edded in it. *!at
is- it is i$"ortant %or inestigators to descri#e
t!e de%ining %eatures o% t!e e-learning
"rogra$s t!ey e.a$ine
so %indings across di%%erent studies can #e
a""ro"riately aggregated and co$"ared. In
reality- !o+eer- aut!ors co$$only
neglect to re"ort i$"ortant details a#out
t!e learn- ing tec!nologies and learner
e."eriences t!ey e.a$ine.
De use t!e u$#rella ter$ 5e-learning6 to
re%er to all %or$s o% electronically su""orted
instruction. In t!eir reie+- 0ro+n-
8!arlier- and Pierotti %or$ally de%ine 5e-
learning6 as
5a #road array o% a""lications and
"rocesses t!at s!are a co$$on %eature o%
relying on so$e ty"e o% co$"uter
tec!nology to "ro- $ote learning.6
G
*!at
e."ansie de%inition %its nicely +it! our
o+n o#>ectie- +!ic! is to "roide a #road
reie+ o% tec!nology in
"ostsecondary education. 9not!er %eature
co$$on to $ost "ostsecondary e-learning
is t!at it relies on t!e Internet.
F
9s noted-
t!e ter$ 5e-learning-6 along +it! 5online
learning6 and 5+e#-#ased instruction-6 usu-
ally re%ers to instruction deliered t!roug!
net+or) tec!nology. 2inally- +e use t!e
ter$ 5e-learning6 #ecause it is co$$only
used a$ong t!e general "u#lic- as +ell as #y
colleges +!en t!ey re%er to t!eir
tec!nology- ena#led courses or degree
"rogra$s. 2or e.a$"le- a Google searc!
yields a#out
<? $illion results %or 5e-learning-6
co$"ared +it! 33 $illion %or 5distance
learning6 and
2' $illion %or 5online learning.6 9lt!oug!
+e use t!is #road ter$ t!roug!out t!e
article- +e are care%ul to note +!en
"articu- lar %indings or conclusions are
con%ined to
a s"eci%ic ty"e o% tec!nology.
!urrent "rends in #ostsecondary
E-learning
Institutions o% !ig!er education are "utting
$uc! t!oug!t into !o+ t!ey $ig!t o"ti$i=e
t!eir course enroll$ent and attract ne+
students #y deliering instruction t!roug!
e-learning a""lications. 9$ong t!e $ost
actie "artici"ants in t!e college e-learning
$ar)et are large state syste$s suc! as t!e
(niersity o% Haryland (niersity 8ollege
B(H(8C- Pennsylania State (niersity-
and t!e (niersity o% Hassac!usetts
B(HassOnLineC. In 2'11- $ore t!an G'-'''
students +orld+ide enrolled in at least one
online (H(8 course and t!e uniersity !ad
$ore t!an 23'-''' enroll$ents in online-
only courses. (H(8- +!ic! !as #een
educat- ing students in Euro"e since 1<?<
and in 9sia since 1<:;- clai$s to #e t!e
largest %our-year "u#lic uniersity in t!e
(nited States and t!e largest "u#lic "roider
o% !ig!er education
to +or)ing "ro%essionals and to (.S.
$ilitary "ersonnel and t!eir %a$ily
$e$#ers.
2or-"ro%it uniersities are also a gro+ing
"art o% t!e online college $ar)et. *!e
(niersity o% P!oeni. B(PC- +!ic! descri#es
itsel% as t!e largest "riate uniersity in
Nort! 9$erica- enrolled $ore t!an 3F'-'''
students in degree "rogra$s in 2'11. In its
$ore t!an
1'' degree "rogra$s at t!e associate,s
t!roug! t!e doctoral leel- students can
attend class online- in a traditional
classroo$- or a co$#ination o% #ot!. Its 2'11
Annual Academic Report noted t!at 2.2
"ercent
o% its students are nonresident aliens- 1F.?
"ercent are #lac)- 3;.3 "ercent are +!ite-
and
;F.< "ercent are %e$ale. Hore t!an !al% o%
t!e graduate student #ody consists o%
$inor- ity students.
<
9s o% Se"te$#er 2'1'-
Aa"lan (niersity o%%ered ninety-si.
acade$ic "rogra$s- including %i%ty-nine
degree "ro- gra$s Bassociate,s- #ac!elor,s-
and graduateC- t+o di"lo$a "rogra$s-
t!irty-t+o certi%icate "rogra$s- and t!ree
la+-related degrees t!roug! distance-
#lended online- and on- ca$"us learning.
9ccording to Aa"lan,s
2'1' annual re"ort- o% t!e $ore t!an ;F-'''
students enrolled during 2''<I1'- G:
"ercent +ere +o$en and :: "ercent +ere
oer t!e
age o% t!irty.
1'
Ot!er "ro$inent %or-"ro%it
institutions include Laureate International
(niersities- +!ic! enrolls students %ro$
$ore t!an 12' countries in #ac!elor,s-
$aster,s- and doctoral "rogra$s- and
Strayer
(niersity- +!ic! o%%ers associate,s-
#ac!elor,s- and $aster,s degrees in a ariety
o% areas- including #usiness ad$inistration-
account- ing- and in%or$ation tec!nology.
*!e article #y &aid &e$ing- 8laudia
Goldin- and La+rence Aat= in t!is issue
e.a$ines %or- "ro%it colleges in detail.
11
Oer t!e "ast decade- t!e nu$#er o% stu-
dents enrolling in e-learning courses at t!ese
and ot!er "ostsecondary institutions !as
gro+n dra$atically. *!e National 8enter %or
Education Statistics esti$ates t!at #et+een
2''' and 2''F t!e s!are o% undergraduates
enrolled in at least one online course gre+
%ro$ F "ercent to 2' "ercent.
12
9s noted-
t!e 0a#son Surey Researc! Grou"
esti$ated t!at #y t!e %all o% 2'1'- 31 "ercent
o% all !ig!er education students +ere ta)ing
at least one online course.
13
2urt!er- 0a#son
esti$ated t!at #et+een 2''2 and 2'1'
online enroll$ents gre+ at a rate o% 1F.3
"er- cent- co$"ared +it! >ust $ore t!an 2
"er- cent %or t!e oerall "ostsecondary
education student #ody. 9 2'11 Pe+
Researc! 8enter surey o% $ore t!an 1-'''
(.S. colleges and uniersities %ound t!at F2
"ercent o% co$$u- nity colleges o%%er online
courses- co$"ared +it! G< "ercent o%
researc! uniersities and
;1 "ercent o% li#eral arts colleges.
1?
It also
%ound t!at <1 "ercent o% t+o-year
colleges o%%ered online classes- co$"ared
+it!
F< "ercent o% %our-year "u#lic colleges
and uniersities and ;' "ercent o% "riate
col- leges and uniersities.
The National enter for
Education Statistics estimates
that !et"een #$$$ and #$$%
the share of undergraduates
enrolled in at least one online
course gre" from % percent
to #$ percent.
9ccording to a 2'11 surey conducted #y
t!e Instructional *ec!nology 8ouncil- t!e
s!are o% students ta)ing online classes at
co$$u- nity colleges is s"lit al$ost e3ually
#et+een traditional students aged eig!teen
t!roug! t+enty-%ie B?F "ercentC and
nontraditional students t+enty-si. and oer
B?G "ercentC.
1:
So$e ;2 "ercent o% online students are
%e$aleJ 3G "ercent- $ale. 9lt!oug! online
courses and degrees are o%%ered in a +ide
array o% su#>ect areas- t!e online-only
#ac!elor,s degree $a>or t!at enrolls t!e
$ost students is cri$inal >ustice. 9s
esti$ated
#y t!e %ir$ Eduentures- 2G "ercent o% all
online-only enroll$ents are in cri$inal >us-
tice- %ollo+ed #y 1< "ercent in co$"uter
and in%or$ation tec!nology- 1; "ercent in
!ealt! care- and 1? "ercent in #usiness.
1;
Online enroll$ents are esti$ated to #e
gro+ing $ost ra"idly in %ields related to
!ealt! care.
1G
Is E-learning as Effecti$e as %ther
&eli$ery 'edia?
Een as online enroll$ent continues to
gro+- concerns re$ain a#out t!e legiti$acy
and alue o% e-learning in "ostsecondary
educa- tion. *!e de#ate a#out t!e
e%%ectieness
o% e-learning !as !istorically #een cast in
ter$s o% !o+ electronic deliery o% instruc-
tion co$"ares +it! ot!er %or$s o% deliery-
"articularly traditional classroo$ deliery-
+!ic! re$ains t!e $ost co$$on %or$ o%
instruction in !ig!er education. 2or rea-
sons +e discuss later- +e do not %ind
studies co$"aring t!e e%%ectieness o%
di%%erent $edia terri#ly enlig!tening. 0ut
#ecause t!is co$"arison !as attracted
signi%icant attention not only %ro$
acade$ics #ut also %ro$ ad$inistrators and
t!e general "u#lic- +e ne.t "roide an
oerie+ o% acade$ic and "u#lic
"ers"ecties on t!e co$"aratie
e%%ectieness o% e-learning and ot!er
deliery $edia. De t!en reie+ e$"irical
eidence
on e%%ectieness and discuss its
i$"lications %or e-learning in
"ostsecondary settings.
(cademic and #u)lic #ers*ecti$es
on the Effecti$eness of E-learning
9$ong researc!ers- ie+s on t!e relatie
e%%ectieness o% e-learning and traditional
instruction %all into t+o "ri$ary ca$"s.
Ric!ard 8lar) !as argued t!at t!ere is not!-
ing uni3uely adantageous to any deliery
$ediu$ and t!at- t!ere%ore- a +ell-designed
$edia co$"arison study s!ould %ind no
e%%ects.
1F
8lar) sees tec!nology as a $ere tool
to #e $ani"ulated at t!e !ands o% instruc-
tional design- "edagogical a""roac!es- and
teac!er "ractices. 9s !e "uts it- 5$edia only
delier instruction #ut do not in%luence
learn- ing.6
1<
In t!e sa$e ein- Steen Ross-
Gary Horrison- and &e#ora! Lo+t!er
contend
t!at 5educational tec!nology is not a !o$o-
geneous Einterention, #ut a #road ariety
o% $odalities- tools- and strategies %or
learning. Its e%%ectieness- t!ere%ore-
de"ends on !o+ +ell it !el"s teac!ers and
students ac!iee t!e desired instructional
goals.6
2'
In su$- according to t!is ie+- e-
learning s!ould
#e no $ore or less e%%ectie t!an any ot!er
%or$ o% instructional deliery. 9s +it! ot!er
ty"es o% instruction- e-learning,s
e%%ectieness de"ends on !o+ +ell it is
designed to cre-
ate t!e instructional e."erience t!at $a)es
learning "ossi#le.
9cade$ic adocates o% e-learning- #y con-
trast- cite nu$erous "otential "edagogical
#ene%its- suc! as custo$i=ing instruction
to t!e learner- creating $ulti$edia Bte.t-
i$ages- sound- ideoC in%or$ation eniron-
$ents- and increasing interactiity.
21
0ecause
$any $edia tools today !ae $oed #eyond
si$"le "rerecorded ideos and can no+ o%%er
$ore interaction #et+een learners and teac!-
ers- a$ong learners- and #et+een t!e learner
and t!e content- so$e o#serers argue t!at
di%%erent deliery $edia can o%%er uni3ue
learning su""ort. *!ey contend t!at in cer-
tain situations e-learning can lead to #etter
acade$ic outco$es #y creating an instruc-
tional e."erience t!at is di%%icult or i$"os-
si#le to create in t!e classroo$ or t!roug!
alternatie $edia.
9 t!ird "ers"ectie on t!e e%%ectieness o%
e-learning- $ore "realent a$ong t!e
general "u#lic t!an a$ong acade$ics- is t!at
t!e outco$es associated +it! e-learning
courses are in%erior to t!ose o% traditional-
%ace-to- %ace instruction. Dillia$ 0o+en and
!is
co-aut!ors cite 5concerns t!at at least so$e
)inds o% online learning are lo+ 3uality and
t!at online learning in general de-"ersonal-
i=es education.6
22
9s noted- t!e Pe+
Researc! 8enter re"orts t!at a $a>ority o%
t!e gen-
eral "u#lic- including young adults +!o
!ae gro+n u" in a digital +orld- #eliees
t!at online courses o%%er less educational
alue t!an traditional classroo$ courses.
23
La+rence 0aco+ and seeral colleagues also
note t!at $any %aculty are s)e"tical o% t!e
alue o% e-learning #ecause it di%%ers %ro$
t!e +ay in +!ic! t!ey +ere taug!t and
#ecause t!ey %ear it +ill distance t!e$ %ro$
t!eir stu- dents- t!ere#y under$ining t!e
educational and $entoring "rocess.
2?
Em*irical E$idence on
Effecti$eness
Oer t!e "ast seeral decades- t!ousands
o% studies !ae e.a$ined t!e e%%ectie-
ness o% e-learning- #roadly de%ined. Huc!
o% t!is +or) !as co$"ared e-learning +it!
traditional classroo$ instruction and
ot!er %or$s o% deliery $edia. Early
researc! %ocused "ri$arily on ealuating
distance
education- suc! as teleised #roadcasts and
ideocon%erencing- #ut oer ti$e attention
s!i%ted to co$"uter-#ased instruction and
$ost recently to online instruction as +ell as
co$"uter-#ased si$ulations. Pro"onents o%
t!is researc! argue t!at a syste$atic account
e."laining +!y and !o+ learning e%%ectie-
ness di%%ers #et+een di%%erent %or$s o%
deli- ery could !el" "olicy $a)ers-
ad$inistrators- researc!ers- and educational-
design s"ecial- ists deter$ine t!e
e3uialency and alue o% ongoing
innoation.
2:
Oer t!e years- !o+eer- e-learning
researc! !as #een !a$strung #y seeral
i$"ortant $et!odological li$itations.
9lt!oug! t!ese de%iciencies are so$eti$es
#eyond t!e control o% inestigators- t!ey
!ae nonet!e- less led to 3uestions a#out t!e
alidity o%
t!e researc! %indings.
2;
2or e.a$"le- $any
studies !ae used +!at is called 5single
grou" "retest- "ost-test designs-6 +!ic! can
lead to an u"+ard #ias in e%%ect si=es.
2G
9nd
een in $ore so"!isticated t+o-grou" study
designs t!at co$"are treat$ent grou"s +it!
co$- "arison- or control- grou"s- "artici"ants
are o%ten not rando$ly assigned to treat$ent
and control conditions Bonly in t!e gold
standard- or e."eri$ental- study designs are
"artici- "ants assigned rando$lyC.
Partici"ants $ay t!us sel%-select into
di%%erent instructional conditions- +!ic! can
allo+ "ree.isting di%- %erences a$ong t!e$
to go un$easured and lead to #ias in
o#sered e%%ects. 9s a second illustration o%
$et!odological li$its- so$e studies- een
t!ose +it! co$"arison grou"s- can con%ound
di%%erences in deliery $edia +it!
di%%erences in instruction.
2F
In ot!er +ords-
t!e instruction receied #y "artici- "ants in
t!e e-learning condition is o%ten not
e3uialent to t!at receied #y "artici"ants in
t!e classroo$ or co$"arison condition. In
certain %or$s o% e-learning- suc! as si$ula-
tions- %or e.a$"le- students $ay #e re3uired
to engage $ore actiely t!an t!ey +ould in a
classroo$ eniron$ent. 0ecause instructional
$et!ods t!at %acilitate actie engage$ent
en!ance learning- di%%erences in ac!iee$ent
$ay #e attri#uta#le to di%%erences in acti-
ity leel rat!er t!an in t!e deliery $edia
"er se.
2<
*!e curriculu$ $aterials and t!e
ti$e s"ent in learning can also di%%er across
t!e e-learning and co$"arison grou"s- t!us
leading to di%%erences in ac!iee$ent. In
s!ort- #ecause di%%erences in deliery $edia
are o%ten associated +it! di%%erences in ot!er
instructional %eatures- studies t!at contrast
di%%erent deliery $edia are o%ten not
$a)ing a""les-to-a""les co$"arisons.
9 co$"re!ensie reie+ o% t!is ast and
dierse researc! literature is #eyond t!e
sco"e o% t!is article. Instead- +e %ocus on
seeral $eta-analyses t!at !ae #een con-
ducted on e-learning researc!. Heta-analysis
is a tec!ni3ue %or co$#ining t!e results o%
$ulti"le studies to o#tain an oerall esti$ate
o% a "articular e%%ect or relations!i". One o%
t!e adantages o% $eta-analysis is t!at #y
aggregating t!e %indings o% $ulti"le studies it
reduces t!e in%luence o% %actors t!at are idio-
syncratic to a s"eci%ic study. In addition- t!e
$eta-analyses t!at +e e.a$ine ac)no+ledge
t!e $et!odological li$itations noted a#oe
and ta)e ste"s to try to address t!e$. 2or
e.a$"le- all o% t!e $eta-analyses screened
studies to ensure t!ey $et a #asic leel o%
$et!odological rigor- suc! as e$"loying i%
not an e."eri$ental design- at least a 3uasi-
e."eri$ental design- in +!ic! t!ere is a
co$"arison grou" t!at receies a co$"ara#le
treat$ent and o%ten an atte$"t to statisti-
cally control %or di%%erences #et+een t!e
students engaged in e-learning and t!ose
engaged in ot!er %or$s o% learning. Studies
t!at did not $eet t!ese $ini$u$ standards
+ere e.cluded %ro$ t!e $eta-analyses.
2urt!er$ore- eac! o% t!e $eta-analyses
recorded $et!odological and su#stantie
di%%erences across studies- suc! as +!et!er
t!e curriculu$ and instruction +as e3uia-
lent in t!e treat$ent and co$"arison condi-
tions- and e.a$ined t!ese di%%erences to see
+!et!er t!ey a%%ected t!e results. &es"ite
t!ese e%%orts- t!e studies included in t!e
$eta-analyses ary signi%icantly in ter$s o%
$et!odology. 9nd #ecause $any studies
"roide li$ited in%or$ation a#out t!e nature
o% instruction in di%%erent conditions- it is
i$"ossi#le to account %ully %or "otentially
i$"ortant instructional di%%erences t!at $ay
#e in%luencing t!e %indings. 2or e.a$"le- in
t!eir $eta-analysis- Ro#ert 0ernard and !is
co-aut!ors note t!at t!e studies o% e-learning
t!ey reie+ed co$$only descri#e t!or-
oug!ly t!e e-learning condition- #ut o%%er
little detail a#out t!e co$"arison condition
Bclassroo$ instructionC.
3'
*!ese li$itations not+it!standing- +e #eliee
t!e $eta-analyses "roide t!e $ost co$"re-
!ensie assess$ent o% t!e e%%ectieness o%
e-learning relatie to ot!er deliery $edia.
De ne.t reie+ t!e %indings o% seeral $eta-
analyses- e$"!asi=ing $ore recent reie+s
#ecause t!ey o%ten incor"orate studies
analy=ed in earlier reie+s and are also $ore
li)ely to include studies t!at e.a$ine t!e
e%%ectieness o% $odern %or$s o% e-learning
suc! as +e#-#ased learning and interactie
si$ulations. In addition- +e deote attention
to reie+s t!at %ocus "ri$arily on adult learn-
ers #ecause t!ose %indings are $ore li)ely to
generali=e to college students.
+esults of 'eta-(nalysis
*!e $eta-analysis conducted #y 0ernard
and !is colleagues e.a$ined 232 studies
Byielding ;FF e%%ect si=esC dated %ro$ 1<F:
to
2''2 t!at co$"ared e-learning B+!ic! t!ey
ter$ed distance educationC +it! traditional-
or classroo$- instruction on $easures o%
ac!iee$ent- student attitude- and course
co$"letion.
31
*!e studies %ocused on t+o
ty"es o% e-learning7async!ronous B$ostly
corres"ondence and online courses- in +!ic!
students "artici"ate at di%%erent ti$esC and
sync!ronous B$ostly telecon%erencing and
satellite-#ased deliery- in +!ic! all students
"artici"ate si$ultaneouslyC7and included
a $i.ed "o"ulation o% students- including
A-12- graduate- and $ilitary- alt!oug! $ost
+ere undergraduates. Heasures o% student
ac!iee$ent s!o+ed no signi%icant oerall
di%%erence #et+een e-learning and classroo$
instruction. Heasures o% student attitude
s!o+ed a s$all #ut signi%icant di%%erence-
+it! students generally %aoring
classroo$ instruction oer e-learning-
alt!oug! t!ey rated only sync!ronous e-
learning sig- ni%icantly lo+er t!an t!ey
rated classroo$ instruction. 8ourse
co$"letion $easures s!o+ed a ery s$all
#ut signi%icant oerall di%%erence in %aor
o% classroo$ instruc- tion- t!oug! only
+!en co$"ared +it! async!ronous e-
learning. In su$$ary- t!e
$eta-analysis reealed no signi%icant oerall
di%%erence #et+een e-learning and
traditional instruction in ter$s o% oerall
ac!iee$ent- #ut $ore negatie student
attitudes to+ard sync!ronous e-learning and
!ig!er dro"out rates in async!ronous e-
learning.
&easures of student attitude
sho"ed a small !ut significant
difference' "ith students
generally fa(oring classroom
instruction o(er e-learning'
although they rated only
synchronous e-learning
significantly lo"er than they
rated classroom instruction.
9 $eta-analysis #y *raci Sit=$ann and
seeral colleagues co$"ared t!e e%%ectie-
ness o% classroo$ and +e#-#ased instruction-
de%ined as a 5!y"er$edia-#ased
instructional "rogra$- +!ic! utili=es t!e
attri#utes and resources o% t!e Dorld Dide
De# to create
a $eaning%ul learning eniron$ent +!ere
learning is %ostered and su""orted.6
32
*!eir
analysis o% ninety-si. "u#lis!ed and un"u#-
lis!ed studies inoling 1<-331 students
%ound t!at +e#-#ased instruction +as ;
"ercent $ore e%%ectie t!an traditional
classroo$ instruction %or teac!ing declaratie
)no+l- edge B%acts and "rinci"lesC- #ut not
"rocedural )no+ledge Brules and "roceduresC
or student reactions. (sed as a su""le$ent to
classroo$ instruction B#lended learningC-
+e#-#ased instruction +as 13 "ercent $ore
e%%ectie
t!an classroo$ instruction %or declaratie
)no+ledge and 2' "ercent $ore e%%ectie
%or "rocedural )no+ledge. *!ese
%indings-
!o+eer- s!ould #e inter"reted +it!
caution #ecause o%%ering +e#-#ased
instruction as a su""le$ent $ay lead to
$ore learning ti$e or ot!er i$"ortant
instructional di%%erences relatie to t!e
co$"arison classroo$ condi- tion. Indeed-
t!e aut!ors %ound +e#-#ased and classroo$
instruction e3ually e%%ectie %or teac!ing
declaratie )no+ledge +!en
t!e instructional $et!ods used in #ot! +ere
e3uialent. *!ey attri#ute t!e s$all oerall
adantage o% +e#-#ased instruction to its use
o% $ore Band $ore e%%ectieC instructional
$et!ods- rat!er t!an to t!e deliery $edia
"er se.
9not!er recent $eta-analysis- conducted
#y t!e (.S. &e"art$ent o% Education-
O%%ice o% Planning- Ealuation- and Policy
&eelo"$ent- e.a$ined %i%ty inde"endent
e%%ect si=es %ro$ %orty-%ie studies
ealuat- ing online learning.
33
9lt!oug!
t!e $eta- analysis +as designed to dra+
conclusions a#out online learning in t!e
conte.t o%
A-12 education- only %ie studies +it! A-12
students $et t!e inclusion criteria set #y t!e
aut!ors. *!e re$aining studies %ocused on
college undergraduates or t!ose in gradu-
ate "rogra$s or "ro%essional training. *!e
%indings reealed t!at students +!o too) a
course online did not "er%or$ signi%icantly
di%%erently t!an t!ose ta)ing t!e sa$e course
t!roug! traditional %ace-to-%ace instruction.
Students in courses t!at co$#ined online
and %ace-to-%ace instruction B#lended
learn- ingC !ad stronger learning outco$es
t!an did t!ose in %ace-to-%ace instruction
alone. 0ot! instructor-directed and
colla#oratie
and interactie online instruction B#ot! %ully
online and #lendedC led to stronger
outco$es t!an classroo$ instruction- #ut
outco$es in inde"endent online learning
and %ace-to-%ace instruction !ad no
signi%icant di%%erence. 2inally- t!e "ositie
e%%ect o% online learning B#ot! %ully online
and #lendedC +as reduced so$e+!at +!en
curriculu$ $aterials and instructional
a""roac! +ere e3uialent
across conditions.
In a study "u#lis!ed in 2'11- Sit=$ann used
$eta-analytic tec!ni3ues to e.a$ine t!e
instructional e%%ectieness o% co$"uter-
#ased si$ulation ga$es.
3?
*!e studies t!at
s!e analy=ed used di%%erent )inds o%
co$"arison grou"s- +it! "artici"ants in
so$e recei-
ing no training and t!ose in ot!ers recei-
ing alternatie instructional $et!ods. *o
#e included in t!e $eta-analysis- a study
!ad
to %ocus on adult learners Baged eig!teen or
olderC and on training t!at %acilitated "oten-
tially >o#-releant )no+ledge or s)ills. *!e
analysis- +!ic! coered a total o% si.ty-%ie
inde"endent sa$"les %ro$ %i%ty-%ie re"orts-
reealed t!at trainees in t!e si$ulation ga$e
grou" !ad 11 "ercent !ig!er declaratie
)no+ledge- 1? "ercent !ig!er "rocedural
)no+ledge- < "ercent !ig!er retention- and
2' "ercent !ig!er sel%-e%%icacy t!an trainees
in t!e co$"arison grou". *!e entertain$ent
alue o% t!e si$ulation did not in%luence its
e%%ectieness- nor did di%%erences in $et!od-
ology across studies B%or e.a$"le- studies
+it! and +it!out rando$ assign$entC.
Results
did ary- !o+eer- #y t!e ty"e o%
instruction "roided to t!e co$"arison
grou" and t!e si$ulation grou". Si$ulation
ga$es +ere
$ore e%%ectie t!an lectures- assign$ents-
and readings- #ut less e%%ectie t!an
co$"ut- eri=ed tutorials. *rainees learned
$ore %ro$ si$ulation ga$es +!en t!ey !ad
unli$ited access to t!e ga$es B"resu$a#ly
leading
to $ore ti$e s"ent learningC and +!en
t!e ga$es +ere e$#edded in a "rogra$ o%
instruction B#lended learningC. In %act- +!en
si$ulation ga$es +ere t!e sole instructional
$et!od- trainees in t!e co$"arison grou"
learned $ore t!an t!ose in t!e si$ulation
ga$e grou". 2inally- in studies t!at $atc!ed
t!e si$ulation and co$"arison grou"s in
ter$s o% t!e actiity leel o% instruction-
learning +as si$ilar across conditions. Once
again- t!is %inding suggests t!at t!e learners
in t!e si$ulation ga$es condition $ay !ae
#een adantaged not #ecause o% t!e deliery
$edia "er se- #ut rat!er #ecause t!ey o%ten
receied $ore actie instruction t!an t!ose in
t!e co$"arison grou".
Effecti$eness of E-learning, !onclusions
*!ese $eta-analytic studies "aint a rat!er
co$"le. "icture o% t!e e%%ectieness o%
e-learning. Oerall t!eir %indings- as +ell as
t!e %indings o% earlier reie+s not discussed
!ere- suggest t!at e-learning is at least as
e%%ectie as- and in so$e cases $ore e%%ec-
tie t!an- classroo$ instruction. 0ut ta)ing
into account arious $et!odological and
instructional %actors can c!ange t!e %ind-
ings7ty"ically not reersing t!e$ #ut rat!er
+ea)ening or eli$inating t!e o#sered #en-
e%its o% e-learning. 2urt!er$ore- so$e o% t!e
$eta-analyses %ound +idely arying e%%ect
si=es %or t!e relations!i" #et+een e-learning
and t!e learning outco$es- +it! so$e stud-
ies %inding e-learning $uc! $ore e%%ectie
t!an classroo$ instruction and ot!ers %ind-
ing it $uc! less e%%ectie. Suc! aria#ility
suggests t!at ot!er e."lanations7suc!
as as"ects o% t!e instruction- teac!er e%%ec-
tieness- or student c!aracteristics7
account
%or t!e relatie e%%ectieness o% e-learning in
t!e studies.
Seeral recent studies t!at !ae atte$"ted
to address t!e de%iciencies o% earlier +or)
in t!is area !ae "roided a $ore rigor-
ous ealuation o% t!e e%%ect o% e-learning on
student ac!iee$ent. &aid 2iglio- Har)
Rus!- and Lu /in- %or e.a$"le- rando$ly
assigned students in a large introductory
$icroecono$ics course to eit!er lie lectures
or online deliery o% t!e recorded lectures.
3:
*!e sections di%%ered only in t!e $et!od o%
deliery and +ere identical in all ot!er +ays-
including t!e instruction- assign$ents- and
teac!ing assistant su""ort. Oerall- t!e
course e.a$ scores %or students in t!e lie
instruction and online sections s!o+ed no
signi%icant di%%erence- alt!oug! certain stu-
dents7s"eci%ically- 4is"anic students- $ales-
and lo+ ac!ieers7"er%or$ed signi%icantly
#etter in t!e lie instruction section. In a
study already noted- Dillia$ 0o+en and !is
co-aut!ors rando$ly assigned students in an
introductory statistics course conducted at
si. "u#lic uniersities to eit!er a traditional
classroo$-#ased section or a !y#rid section.
3;
In t!e !y#rid section- $ost o% t!e instruc-
tion +as deliered t!roug! interactie online
$aterials- #ut students also attended %or one
!our a +ee) a %ace-to-%ace session +!ere t!ey
could as) 3uestions and receie assistance.
Student learning outco$es in t!e traditional
and !y#rid sections s!o+ed no statistically
signi%icant di%%erence. Nor did outco$es
di%%er across su#grou"s7+!et!er #y race
and et!nicity- gender- or college grade "oint
aerage7indicating t!at no su#grou"s o%
students consistently #ene%ited %ro$ or +ere
!ar$ed #y t!e !y#rid %or$at. *!e rigorous
design o% #ot! o% t!ese studies $ade "os-
si#le a "recise esti$ate o% t!e di%%erences Bor
lac) t!ereo%C #et+een conditions. 9s a
result- t!oug! #ot! reac!ed t!e sa$e
conclusion
as t!e $eta-analyses7t!at e-learning is- on
aerage- as e%%ectie as traditional classroo$
instruction7t!eir use o% rando$
assign$ent and strong controls engenders
$ore con%i- dence in t!eir %indings.
So- +!at can +e ulti$ately conclude %ro$ t!e
$ultitude o% studies co$"aring t!e e%%ectie-
ness o% e-learning and ot!er %or$s o% instruc-
tion@ *!e current #ody o% eidence a""ears
to su""ort t!e "osition asserted #y Ric!ard
8lar) $ore t!an t+o decades agoK "edagogy-
not deliery $edia- is +!at in%luences learn-
ing. Or as *erry 9nderson o#seres- 5It
see$s clear t!at t!ere is no single $ediu$
t!at su"- "orts t!e educational e."erience in
a $anner t!at is su"erior in all +ays to t!at
su""orted ia ot!er $edia.6
3G
Rat!er-
c!aracteristics o% t!e instructional design-
suc! as t!e instruc- tional $et!ods used- t!e
%eed#ac) "roided- and t!e degree o% learner
engage$ent- create t!e conditions +it!in
+!ic! learning occurs. *!e $eta-analyses
reie+ed a#oe s!o+ t!at +!en instructional
design c!aracteristics
are !eld constant across deliery conditions-
e-learning and classroo$ instruction gener-
ally "roduce si$ilar learning outco$es. *!at
%inding suggests t!at deliery $edia t!e$-
seles do not a%%ect learning- #ut rat!er are
si$"ly t!e e!icles t!roug! +!ic! instruc-
tional conditions are deliered to t!e learner.
2urt!er$ore- t!e %inding suggests t!at
studies designed to ealuate t!e e%%ectieness
o% a "articular e-learning tec!nology are o%
li$ited alue. Indeed- any %or$ o% instruction
can #e e%%ectie i% it is a#le to create t!e con-
ditions necessary %or students to learn
s"eci%ic content. 9s 0ro+n- 8!arlier- and
Pierotti conclude in t!eir reie+ o% e-
learning- 5+e could study +!et!er "eo"le
learn using iPods +it! no screen- iPods +it! a
s$all screen-
e-readers Be.g.- Noo)s- AindlesC +it! #lac)-
and-+!ite or color screens- iPads B+!ic!
!ae a larger color screenC- and Linsert
%uture
tec!nology !ereM. Inaria#ly- t!e ans+er
to t!e 3uestion +ill #e- yes- "eo"le can
learn using t!ese $edia6 Bitalics in
originalC.
3F
Si$ilarly- studies t!at si$"ly co$"are
di%%er- ent $edia- +it!out considering
di%%erences
in instructional $et!odology or learning
eniron$ents- do not "roide an accurate
"ic- ture o% t!e e%%ectieness o% one ty"e o%
$edia relatie to anot!er. (lti$ately-
researc! needs to $oe #eyond t!e 5does it
+or)6 3uestion to+ard a #etter understanding
o% e.actly +!at does in%luence t!e
e%%ectieness o% e-learning and t!us o% t!e
conditions under +!ic!
e-learning is li)ely to #e $ost e%%ectie.
What -eatures of E-learning
Influence Its Effecti$eness?
Researc!ers !ae no+ #egun to inestigate
t!e e%%ectieness o% e-learning #y ealuating
not t!e di%%erent tec!nologies t!e$seles
#ut rat!er t!e e%%ects o% s"eci%ic
instructional %eatures and su""orts
e$#edded in t!e$. Seeral aut!ors !ae
deelo"ed conce"tual %ra$e+or)s or
ty"ologies o% e-learning to !el" guide suc!
e%%orts. Stee Ao=lo+s)i
and 0rad%ord 0ell- %or e.a$"le- "resent a
ty"ology t!at !ig!lig!ts %our )ey
categories o% instructional %eatures7
content- i$$er- sion- interactiity- and
co$$unication7#y +!ic! e-learning
tec!nologies can create a
s"eci%ic instructional e."erience.
3<
0y
content t!ey $ean t!e leel o% ric!ness +it!
+!ic! in%or$ation is deliered to learners.
*e.t-
%or e.a$"le- is lo+ in in%or$ation ric!ness-
+!ereas i$ages- sound- and ideo are !ig!.
Ao=lo+s)i and 0ell use t!e ter$ immersion
to denote t!e sense o% realis$ t!at e-learning
can create7t!e e.tent to +!ic! t!e learning
e."erience ca"tures t!e "syc!ological and
"!ysical c!aracteristics o% a "er%or$ance.
8ertain %or$s o% tec!nology- %or e.a$"le-
suc! as si$ulations- o%%er greater "ossi#ili-
ties %or en!ancing learners, sense o% #eing
i$$ersed in t!e educational e."erience.
*!e ter$ interacti(ity re%ers to c!aracter-
istics t!at in%luence t!e degree and ty"e o%
interaction #et+een learners Bindiidually
or as grou"sC- #et+een learners and
instruc- tors- and- increasingly- #et+een
learners
and si$ulated c!aracters or irtual agents.
Net+or)ed %or$s o% e-learning- %or e.a$"le-
!ae e."anded t!e "otential %or colla#oration
and interactiity. *!e %inal %eature- commu-
nication ric!ness or #and+idt!- deter$ines
students, a#ility to co$$unicate er#ally
and noner#ally. E-learning "rogra$s di%-
%er in t!e e.tent to +!ic! t!ey $a)e aail-
a#le di%%erent co$$unication c!annels B%or
e.a$"le- audio and ideoC and allo+
students to co$$unicate sync!ronously in
real ti$e.
Ao=lo+s)i and 0ell stress t!at t!e i$"ortance
o% di%%erent %eatures de"ends on t!e goals
o% a "articular learning "rogra$ and t!e
instructional eniron$ent t!at $ust #e cre-
ated to $eet t!e needs o% learners. *!at is-
no con%iguration o% %eatures +ill #e
uniersally e%%ectie or ine%%ectie. Rat!er-
e%%ectieness
is deter$ined #y t!e degree o% %it #et+een
t!e design o% t!e e-learning and t!e c!ar-
acteristics o% t!e course %or +!ic! it is used.
Educators can use researc! o% t!is sort7+or)
t!at %ocuses on !o+ di%%erent tec!nological
con%igurations can delier s"eci%ic instruc-
tional %eatures7to guide decisions a#out
+!ic! ty"e o% e-learning s!ould #e used to
$eet s"eci%ic learning o#>ecties.
Ot!er conce"tual +or) !as %ocused on
isolating s"eci%ic instructional %eatures o%
e-learning. Interactiity !as receied "ar-
ticular attention. In a reie+ o% co$"uter
ga$es and si$ulations- 1enni%er Vogel and
seeral colleagues argue t!at interactiity is
t!e )ey instructional co$"onent t!at in%lu-
ences learning outco$es.
?'
In 1<F<-
Hic!ael Hoore identi%ied t!ree %or$s o%
interaction in distance educationK student-
student inter- action- student-instructor
interaction- and
student-content interaction.
?1
&ra+ing on
Hoore,s ty"ology- *erry 9nderson
"ro"osed t!at e-learning can su""ort
$eaning%ul learning as long as at least one
%or$ o% inter- action is at a !ig! leel.
?2
4ig! leels o% $ul- ti"le %or$s o%
interaction $ay en!ance t!e educational
e."erience- #ut $ay $a)e it less cost- or
ti$e-e%%ectie. D!at 9nderson calls !is
5e3uialency t!eore$67t!at one ty"e
o% interactiity can su#stitute %or t!e ot!ers
+it! little loss in educational e%%ectieness7
%urt!er delineates t!e di%%erent %or$s o%
interactiity and s!o+s !o+ di%%erent tec!-
nologies can $eet learner needs t!roug!
di%- %erent ty"es o% interactiity. 2uture
researc! $ust directly test t!e e3uialency
t!eore$
to learn +!et!er s"eci%ic ty"es o%
interaction are #etter suited t!an ot!ers to
$eet s"eci%ic learner needs and instructional
o#>ecties.
E$"irical researc! is also s!i%ting a+ay
%ro$ ealuating +!et!er e-learning +or)s
and to+ard e.a$ining t!e instructional
%eatures t!at in%luence its e%%ectieness.
Rat!er t!an co$"aring di%%erent %or$s o%
deliery suc!
as e-learning ersus classroo$- studies are
#eginning to co$"are e-learning "rogra$s
t!at di%%er on i$"ortant instructional di$en-
sions- including interactiity- engage$ent
and actiity- and %eed#ac). Ric!ard Hayer-
%or e.a$"le- !as conducted researc! on
$ulti$edia learning to #etter understand
!o+ "eo"le learn in suc! eniron$ents
and to identi%y +!ic! as"ects o% t!ose
eniron- $ents can !el" di%%erent ty"es o%
learners ac3uire di%%erent )inds o%
)no+ledge.
?3
Ro#ert 0ernard and seeral coaut!ors !ae
conducted a $eta-analysis to e.a$ine !o+
di%%erent ty"es o% interaction in%luence t!e
e%%ectieness o% e-learning "rogra$s- +!ic!
t!ey call distance education.
??
0ased on
seenty-%our e%%ect si=es dra+n %ro$ seenty-
%our studies- t!ey %ound t!at "rogra$s
o%%ering $oderate to !ig! leels o%
interaction
!ad #etter ac!iee$ent outco$es t!an t!ose
o%%ering less interaction. *!ey %ound-
interest- ingly- t!at "rogra$s t!at
incor"orated stu- dent-student or student-
content interaction
led to #etter ac!iee$ent t!an t!ose o%%ering
student-teac!er interaction. *!ey also %ound
t!at increasing t!e degree o% interaction led
to #etter ac!iee$ent in t!e case o% student-
content interaction- #ut not student-student
or student-instructor interaction. *o re"eat-
t!e e%%ects o% a certain ty"e o% interaction
+ill de"end on !o+ +ell it $atc!es t!e
content and o#>ecties o% a "articular
course. /et- as t!is $eta-analysis s!o+s- on
aer-
age- interactiity signi%icantly in%luences t!e
e%%ectieness o% e-learning "rogra$s- and
certain ty"es o% interaction $ay lead to #et-
ter outco$es t!an ot!ers.
In su$$ary- researc! "roides eidence t!at
e-learning can e%%ectiely delier instruction
in "ostsecondary settings. 9s +it! any deli-
ery $edia- +!et!er a "articular e-learning
"rogra$ is e%%ectie in a gien situation +ill
de"end on its ca"acity to create t!e condi-
tions necessary %or students to learn. *!e
)ey c!allenges no+ %acing college
ad$inistra-
tors and %aculty are to decide +!en to use
e-learning and !o+ to design and delier
it to $a.i$i=e student ac!iee$ent. 9s
yet- !o+eer- e-learning researc! "roides
$ini$al guidance on t!ese central 3uestions.
In ot!er areas- suc! as t!e organi=ational
training literature- researc!ers !ae $a""ed
t!e e%%ectieness o% s"eci%ic training design
%eatures- suc! as lecture- sel%-instruction- or
discussion- as a %unction o% t!e s)ill or tas)
#eing taug!t.
?:
Suc! researc! can guide deci-
sions a#out +!at $et!ods s!ould #e used
to teac! di%%erent s)ills or tas)s. 9s noted-
si$ilar researc! ealuating t!e e%%ectieness
o% e-learning %eatures suc! as interactiity
and i$$ersion %or teac!ing di%%erent con-
tent +ould !el" curriculu$ "lanners decide
+!en e-learning is a""ro"riate and +!at
ty"e o% e-learning s!ould #e used to delier
t!e %eatures critical to learning in a
"articular course or "rogra$.
.arriers to E-learning
in #ostsecondary Education
O#serers !ae "ointed to a nu$#er o%
"otential o#stacles to e-learning instruction
in !ig!er education.
?;
In t!is %inal section
+e e.a$ine seeral e$erging issues and
trends
t!at +e #eliee $ay create signi%icant
#arriers to t!e +ides"read ado"tion o% e-
learning in t!e nation,s colleges and
uniersities.
-raud and !heating %nline
9s eidence accu$ulates a#out !o+ to
$a)e online learning e%%ectie- concerns are
gro+- ing a#out "ro#le$s t!at e-learning
"oses
%or students, acade$ic integrity. 9cade$ic
dis!onesty !as ty"ically #een c!aracteri=ed
#y t!e %ollo+ing o%%ensesK 5acts o% "lagia-
ris$- using concealed notes to c!eat on
tests- e.c!anging +or) +it! ot!er students-
#uy- ing essays or- in so$e e.tre$e and
notorious cases- as)ing ot!ers to sit
e.a$inations %or you.6
?G
Researc! !as long
docu$ented t!e +ides"read "realence o%
suc! %or$s o% dis- !onesty in "ostsecondary
institutions.
In 1<;?- %or e.a$"le- 0ill 0o+ers
"u#lis!ed t!e %irst large-scale study o% sel%-
re"orted c!eating in "ostsecondary
institutions.
?F
In
a sa$"le o% $ore t!an :-''' students %ro$
ninety-nine (.S. colleges and uniersities- !e
%ound t!at t!ree-3uarters o% t!e students
!ad engaged in at least one dis!onest
acade$ic #e!aior. &uring t!e 1<<3I<?
acade$ic
year- &onald Hc8a#e and Linda *reino
sureyed a""ro.i$ately 1-F'' students at
nine o% t!e sc!ools t!at !ad "artici"ated in
0o+ers,s original study.
?<
*!ey %ound t!at
alt!oug! t!e s!are o% students +!o c!eated
!ad increased only slig!tly- %ro$ ;3
"ercent
in 1<;3 to G' "ercent in 1<<3- c!eaters %ro$
t!e 1<<3 grou" engaged in a +ider ariety
o% c!eating- c!eated $ore o%ten- and
engaged
in $ore %or$s o% e.a$ c!eating. *!e s!are
o% students ad$itting to colla#orating on
indi- idual assign$ents >u$"ed %ro$ 11
"ercent
in 1<;3 to ?< "ercent in 1<<3.
Hore recently- studies !ae #egun s"eci%i-
cally to e.a$ine acade$ic dis!onesty in
online learning eniron$ents. In 2'';-
Har) Lanier sureyed 1-2;2 students at a
large- state-%unded uniersity and %ound
t!at sel%-re"orted c!eating +as $ore "rea-
lent in online classes t!an in traditional
lecture courses.
:'
In 2''' Aristen Aennedy
and seeral colleagues %ound t!at #ot!
students and ad$inistrators #eliee it is
easier to c!eat in distance learning classes.
:1
Aennet! 8!a"$an and seeral colleagues
conducted a surey o% F2? #usiness stu-
dents- #ot! undergraduate and graduate-
and %ound t!at a""ro.i$ately G: "ercent
ad$itted to c!eating at so$e "oint in t!eir
courses.
:2
9$ong t!ose +!o !ad ta)en an
e-learning course- 2? "ercent ad$itted to
!aing c!eated on a +e#-#ased e.a$ina-
tion. Hore stri)ingly- ?2 "ercent
indicated t!at t!ey +ould c!eat on
electronic e.a$s i% gien t!e o""ortunity.
9 recent re"ort #y t!e Goern$ent
9ccounta#ility O%%ice
BG9OC also re"orted a set o% alar$ing %ind-
ings "ertaining to %aculty and ad$inistratie
toleration o% acade$ic dis!onesty in online
courses at %or-"ro%it institutions.
:3
Hany institutions are e."loring +ays to
address c!eating in online courses- includ-
ing !aing students ta)e e.a$s on ca$"us
or in testing centers or re"lacing !ig!-sta)es
testing +it! assess$ents- suc! as longer-
ter$ "ro>ects- t!at are seen as less susce"ti#le
to c!eating.
:?
Per!a"s $ore i$"ortant- col-
leges $ust ensure t!at institutional "olicies
regarding acade$ic dis!onesty and course
grading standards are %ollo+ed strictly to
create a culture o% acade$ic integrity in t!e
online eniron$ent. *!e +or) o% &onald
Hc8a#e- Linda *reino- and Aennet!
0utter%ield suggests t!at "erceied social
nor$s- attitudes to+ard c!eating- and
)no+l- edge o% institutional "olicy regarding
c!eating +ill generally "redict course
conduct %ro$ students in online learning
eniron$ents.
::
/ow-Income and 0nder*re*ared
Students
One argu$ent in %aor o% e-learning is its
"otential to i$"roe access to !ig!er
educa- tion a$ong lo+er-inco$e and
acade$ically under"re"ared students.
Online learning- su""orters say- $a)es
"ostsecondary educa- tion $ore a%%orda#le-
e."ands geogra"!ic access B%or e.a$"le- to
rural areasC- and "roides needed %le.i#ility
%or students +!o cannot attend traditional
classes #ecause o% %ull-ti$e +or) and
c!ild-care res"onsi#ili- ties. Reali=ing t!at
"otential- !o+eer- +ill not #e easy.
Oer t!e "ast t+o decades- $uc! "u#lic
discussion !as %ocused on 5digital
diides6 and t!eir i$"lications %or #ot!
yout! and adults. In an article in t!e
Encyclopedia
of Adolescence Linda 1ac)son descri#es
t!ree generations o% suc! diides- all #y
inco$e and race.
:;
*!e %irst generation +as
t!e diide in access to digital tec!nologies-
es"ecially t!e InternetJ access increased +it!
inco$e and +as !ig!er a$ong +!ites t!an
9%rican 9$ericans. 9s "u#lic access to t!e
Internet increased in sc!ools- li#raries- and
ot!er "u#lic s"aces- a second digital diide
e$erged- again "ri$arily #y inco$e and
race- t!is one #ased on #road#and Internet
access. Researc!ers- educators- and "olicy
$a)ers !ae argued t!at #road#and access
%unda- $entally c!anges t!e +ay "eo"le
interact
+it! t!e Internet- including !o+ o%ten t!ey
go online- !o+ $uc! ti$e t!ey s"end- and
+!at t!ey do. 9s t!ese ga"s !ae s!o+n
signs o% narro+ing- yet a t!ird digital diide-
t!is one in t!e intensity and nature o%
Internet use- !as gained attention. Researc!
!as
s!o+n t!at a$ong t!ose +it! access to t!e
Internet- 9%rican 9$ericans go online less
o%ten t!an t!eir +!ite "eers. 9 ga" is also
gro+ing #et+een yout! +!o use t!e
Internet in dierse and engaging +ays- suc!
as social net+or)ing or searc!ing %or
in%or$ation a#out $a>or li%e issues B!ealt!
care- %inding a >o#C- and yout! +!o use it as a
$ore narro+ and less engaging resource-
suc! as see)ing entertain$ent online
t!roug! $usic or ideo cli"s. *!ese ty"es o%
diides too tend to #e structured along racial
and et!nic and socio- econo$ic
#ac)grounds.
*!e digital diides- "articularly t!e t!ird-
generation diide- can lead to di%%erences not
only in users, cognitie- social- and
"syc!olog- ical deelo"$ent #ut also in t!eir
tec!nology s)ills and con%idence. 9nd
#ecause lac) o% con%idence is one o% t!e $ost
%re3uently cited #arriers to adult Internet
use- t!ese digital diides $ay- ironically-
decrease enroll$ent
in e-learning a$ong t!e ery grou"s %or
+!o$ e-learning is su""osed to e."and
"ost- secondary access. *!e diides $ay also
raise dro"out rates a$ong students +!o
enroll
in e-learning. Online courses- in %act- o%ten
!ae signi%icantly !ig!er dro"out rates t!an
%ace-to-%ace courses.
:G
One "ri$ary reason
students gie %or dro""ing out is tec!nical
"ro#le$s7"ro#le$s t!at students +it!out
access to #road#and Internet $ay #e es"e-
cially li)ely to e."erience.
:F
9nd students
+!o lac) tec!nology s)ills and con%idence
$ay
#e less li)ely to "ersist +!en suc! "ro#le$s
arise. *!us- i% e-learning is to increase access
to college a$ong lo+-inco$e students and
s"eci%ic racial and et!nic grou"s- institutions
+ill !ae to address digital diides in ter$s
not only o% students, access to tec!nology
#ut also o% t!eir tec!nology s)ills and
literacy.
)nline courses' in fact' often
ha(e significantly higher
dropout rates than face-to-
face courses. )ne primary
reason students gi(e for
dropping out is technical
pro!lems*pro!lems that
students "ithout access to
!road!and +nternet may !e
especially li,ely to
e-perience.
(nder"re"ared students too $ay %ace
#arri- ers to success in e-learning courses.
2iglio- Rus!- and /in- %or e.a$"le- %ound-
in t!e study already noted- t!at students
+it! lo+ grade-"oint aerages +!o enrolled
in t!e
e-learning section o% a $icroecono$ics class
scored signi%icantly lo+er on course e.a$s
t!an did t!ose in t!e lie instruction sec-
tion.
:<
Researc! e.a$ining under"re"ared
students- t!oug! li$ited- !as ty"ically
reac!ed a si$ilar conclusionK acade$ically
under"re"ared students o%ten "er%or$
+orse t!an t!eir "eers in online courses. *!e
%ind-
ing is not sur"rising in lig!t o% t!e
i$"ortance o% sel%-regulatory s)ills in
learning generally. 9nd gien t!at e-learning
o%ten s!i%ts to t!e learner $ore control oer
i$"ortant learn-
ing decisions- suc! as +!at and !o+ $uc!
to study- sel%-regulatory s)ills suc! as sel%-
$onitoring and sel%-ealuation #eco$e
een stronger "redictors o% student
$otiation-
ac!iee$ent- and course co$"letion. One
+ay to i$"roe t!e s)ills o% under"re"ared
students is to #uild instructional su""orts
into e-learning courses to !el" students
sel%-
regulate and $a)e e%%ectie use o% t!e control
t!ey are gien oer t!eir learning.
;'
Seeral
interentions t!at "ro$"t sel%-regulation
t!roug! re%lectie 3uestions also s!o+ "ro$-
ise %or su""orting critical learning "rocesses
during e-learning- t!oug! $ore +or) is
needed to ealuate t!e s"eci%ic e%%ectieness
o% t!ese interentions a$ong acade$ically
under"re"ared students.
;1
Educators,
increas- ing interest in learning analytics also
!olds "ro$ise %or oerco$ing t!e #arriers
%aced
#y t!ese students. &ata collected %ro$ large
"o"ulations o% online learners can "roide
insig!t into t!e usage and "er%or$ance o%
di%%erent ty"es o% learners and !el" curricu-
lu$ "lanners design courses t!at $eet t!e
s"eci%ic needs o% under"re"ared students.
;2
!ost Issues
9lt!oug! one o% t!e $ost co$$on reasons
gien #y acade$ic leaders at "ostsecondary
institutions %or deelo"ing online courses and
"rogra$s is to generate ne+ reenue strea$s
and "otentially to lo+er t!e costs o%
"roiding a "ostsecondary education- t!e
cost-e%%ectie- ness o% e-learning re$ains
largely an o"en 3uestion. La+rence 0aco+
and !is coaut!ors re"ort t!at relatiely %e+
institutions #eliee
e-learning reduces t!eir costs- and- in %act-
$ost #eliee t!at online courses are at least as
e."ensie to "roide as traditional courses.
;3
*!is "ers"ectie is #ased largely on t!e sig-
ni%icant start-u" costs o% e-learning-
including inest$ents in tec!nology- course
design-
and t!e training o% instructors- #ut also on
recurring costs- suc! as t!ose t!at result %ro$
increased coordination de$ands and tec!ni-
cal su""ort. *!ese costs can #e a signi%icant
#arrier to entry %or institutions see)ing to
ado"t e-learning instruction. Indeed- 0a#son
Surey Researc! Grou" esti$ates t!at a
s$all su#set o% "ostsecondary institutions
currently educate t!e $a>ority o% online
students and "redicts t!at %uture gro+t! +ill
co$e largely %ro$ t!ose sa$e institutions
rat!er t!an %ro$ ne+ institutions.
;?
Neert!eless- so$e analysts #eliee t!at
e-learning can reduce t!e cost o%
education. 0o+en and !is coaut!ors- %or
e.a$"le- ran seeral cost si$ulations to try
to esti$ate !o+ $uc! t!e institutions in
t!eir study could sae #y s!i%ting to !y#rid
learning.
;:
9lt!oug! t!e si$ulations are s"eculatie and
t!e results ary de"ending on t!e assu$"-
tions t!at are ado"ted- t!ey s!o+ t!at !y#rid
learning $ay "ro$ise signi%icant saings
in total instructor co$"ensation costs. In
!ig!er education today- %ar $ore e-learning
courses are led #y instructors rat!er t!an #y
$ac!ines- t!us li$iting t!e e.tent to +!ic!
institutions can reali=e t!ese cost saings. 0ut
%uture ado"tion o% $ore interactie-
$ac!ine- guided courses could signi%icantly
lo+er
costs.
;;
*a$ara 0attaglino- Hatt 4alder$an-
and Eleanor Laurans stress t!at t!e i$"or-
tant 3uestion is not si$"ly +!et!er e-
learning is c!ea"er #ut +!et!er it can
ac!iee si$ilar or #etter learning outco$es at
a lo+er cost.
;G
%ther 0nanswered 1uestions Seeral
ot!er i$"ortant 3uestions +ill re3uire t!e
attention o% educators- ad$inis- trators-
and "olicy $a)ers as "ostsecondary e-
learning continues to e."and. One suc!
3uestion concerns t!e i$"act o% e-learning
on $ore distal $easures o% student
ac!iee- $ent- suc! as retention and t!e
trans%er o% learning- #ot! to ot!er courses
and to t!e +or)"lace. Host e-learning
studies assess
student ac!iee$ent during t!e course itsel%
or i$$ediately u"on co$"letion. D!en
t!ese studies assess retention at all- t!ey
usually
do so +it!in a $ont! o% +!en students %inis!
t!e course.
;F
In addition- t!ey o%ten assess
ac!iee$ent #ased on students, cognitie
)no+ledge and attitudes- at t!e e."ense
o% ot!er i$"ortant learning outco$es-
suc!
as !o+ t!ey a""ly +!at t!ey are learning.
9d$ittedly- t!e %ailure to assess
ac!iee$ent using longer-ter$ $easures is
not con%ined
to researc! on e-learningJ $uc! o% t!e adult
learning researc! %ocuses on s!orter-ter$-
cognitie outco$es. /et it is not "ossi#le to
gras" %ully t!e i$"lications o% e-learning in
"ostsecondary settings +it!out e.a$ining
!o+ it a%%ects students, a#ility to retain and
a""ly +!at t!ey !ae learned.
9s colleges increasingly see) to $a)e t!eir e-
learning courses aaila#le to an interna-
tional audience- it +ill also #e i$"ortant to
conduct researc! t!at s"ans di%%erent coun-
tries and cultures. Huc! o% t!e researc! in
t!is area !as #een conducted using college
students in t!e (nited States- +!ic! raises
3uestions a#out +!et!er %indings +ill trans-
late across national and cultural #oundaries.
2or instance- students, attitudes to+ard and
acce"tance o% e-learning $ay ary
de"ending on t!eir cultural nor$s- #elie%s-
and alues.
In addition- researc! !as %ound t!at cultural
di%%erences in tec!nology use and digital
diides t!at !ae #een largely addressed
in t!e (nited States continue to "ersist in
ot!er "arts o% t!e +orld- suc! as rural
8!ina.
;<
In ot!er "arts o% t!e +orld- it $ay
also #e i$"ortant to s!i%t attention %ro$
!o+ e-learning co$"ares to classroo$
learning
to !o+ e-learning can "roide "ostsecondary
educational o""ortunities t!at ot!er+ise do
not e.ist.
!onclusion
*!e use o% e-learning in "ostsecondary
education !as e."anded ra"idly oer t!e "ast
decade- and all indicators suggest t!at gro+t!
+ill continue in t!e years to co$e. E-learning
!as also attracted intensie researc! inter-
est- +it! t!ousands o% studies oer t!e "ast
seeral decades e.a$ining its e%%ectieness.
9lt!oug! t!e do$inant "aradig$ in t!is
area7co$"aring e-learning +it! classroo$
instruction7!as long #een %aulted- researc!
is only no+ #eginning to $oe a+ay %ro$
t!e 5does it +or)6 3uestion to+ard a greater
%ocus on understanding t!e role o% di%%erent
instructional %eatures and su""orts in deter-
$ining t!e e%%ectieness o% e-learning.
2uture researc! s!ould use rigorous
e."eri$ental designs to e.a$ine !o+ e-
learning "rogra$s t!at ary in ter$s o%
content- interactiity-
and ot!er i$"ortant instructional %eatures
a%%ect students, a#ility to ac3uire di%%erent
ty"es o% )no+ledge and s)ills. /et adances
in e-learning design $ust also #e cou"led
+it! e%%orts to eli$inate current #arriers to
t!e +ides"read ado"tion o% online
instruction. 9cade$ics and institutions need
to colla#o- rate to address t!e c!allenges
surrounding acade$ic integrity in online
eniron$ents- deise e%%ectie su""ort
syste$s %or under- "re"ared learners-
ealuate t!e econo$ic $odels t!at underlie
e-learning- and under- stand !o+ to delier
e-learning across geo- gra"!ic and cultural
#oundaries.
Endnotes
1. I. Elaine 9llen and 1e%% Sea$an- .oing the /istance0 )nline Education in the 1nited States' #$22' re"ort
"re"ared %or t!e 0a#son Surey Researc! Grou" BDellesley- Hass.K 0a#son Surey Researc! Grou"-
Noe$#er 2'11C.
2. La+rence S. 0aco+ and ot!ers- Barriers to Adoption of )nline 3earning Systems in 1.S. 4igher
Education- re"ort "re"ared %or It!a)a SNR BNe+ /or)K It!a)a SNR- Hay 2'12C.
3. 9llen and Sea$an- .oing the /istance Bsee note 1C.
?. Paul *aylor and ot!ers- The /igital Re(olution and 4igher Education0 ollege Presidents' Pu!lic /iffer
on 5alue of )nline 3earning' re"ort "re"ared %or Pe+ Social O &e$ogra"!ic *rends BDas!ingtonK Pe+
Researc! 8enter- 9ugust 2'11C.
:. Aennet! G. 0ro+n- Steen &. 8!arlier- and 9#igail Pierotti- 5E-learning at Dor)K 8ontri#utions o% Past
Researc! and Suggestions %or t!e 2uture-6 in +nternational Re(ie" of +ndustrial and )rgani6ational
Psychology' ol. 2G- edited #y Gerard P. 4odg)inson and 1. Aein 2ord B8!ic!ester- (.A.K Diley- 2'12C-
"". F<I11?.
;. Dillia$ G. 0o+en and ot!ers- +nteracti(e 3earning )nline at Pu!lic 1ni(ersities0 E(idence from
Randomi6ed Trials- re"ort "re"ared %or It!aca SNR BNe+ /or)K It!aca SNR- Hay 2'12C- ". G.
G. 0ro+n- 8!arlier- and Pierotti- 5e-Learning at Dor)6 Bsee note :C- ". <3.
F. 9llen and Sea$an- .oing the /istance Bsee note 1C.
<. (niersity o% P!oeni.- #$22 Academic Annual Report Bcdn.assets-"!oeni..net/content/da$/altcloud/doc/
a#outPuo"./acade$ic-annual-re"ort-2'11."d% Q1uly- 3'- 2'12RC.
1'. Aa"lan (niersity- Academic Report0 The 7ear in Re(ie"' #$$8I#$2$ B8!icagoK Aa"lan 4ig!er Education
8or"oration- 2'11C.
11. &aid 1. &e$ing- 8laudia Goldin- and La+rence 2. Aat=- 52or-Pro%it 8olleges-6 Future of hildren 23-
no. 1 B2'13C.
12. 9le.andria Dalton Rad%ord- 3earning at a /istance0 1ndergraduate Enrollment in /istance Education
ourses and /egree Programs- re"ort "re"ared %or t!e National 8enter %or Education Statistics B(.S.
&e"art$ent o% Education- Octo#er 2'11C.
13. 9llen and Sea$an- .oing the /istance Bsee note 1C.
1?. *aylor and ot!ers- The /igital Re(olution and 4igher Education Bsee note ?C.
1:. Instructional *ec!nology 8ouncil- Trends in E-learning0 Trac,ing the +mpact of E-learning at ommunity
olleges BDas!ingtonK Instructional *ec!nology 8ouncil- Harc! 2'12C.
1;. 5Online Learning #y t!e Nu$#ers-6 hronicle of 4igher Education- Noe$#er :- 2'1'- "". 02FI02<.
1G. 9llen and Sea$an- .oing the /istance Bsee note 1C.
1F. Ric!ard E. 8lar)- 5Reconsidering Researc! on Learning %ro$ Hedia-6 Re(ie" of Educational Research
:3 B1<F3CK ??:I?<J Ric!ard E. 8lar)- 5Hedia Dill Neer In%luence Learning-6 Educational Technology
Research and /e(elopment ?2- no. 2 B1<<?CK 21I2<.
1<. Ric!ard E. 8lar) and ot!ers- 59n 9nalysis o% t!e 2ailure o% Electronic Hedia and &iscoery-0ased
LearningK Eidence %or t!e Per%or$ance 0ene%its o% Guided *raining Het!ods-6 in 4and!oo, of Training
and +mpro(ing 9or,place Performance' olu$e 1K +nstructional /esign and Training /eli(ery- edited #y
Aennet! 4. Sil#er and Dellesley R. 2os!ay BNe+ /or)K 1o!n Diley and Sons- 2''<C- ". 2;?.
2'. Steen H. Ross- Gary R. Horrison- and &e#ora! L. Lo+t!er- 5Educational *ec!nology Researc! Past
and PresentK 0alancing Rigor and Releance to I$"act Sc!ool Learning-6 ontemporary Educational
Technology 1- no. 1 B2'1'CK 1<.
21. Elaine A. 0ailey and Horton 8otlar- 5*eac!ing Via t!e Internet-6 ommunication Education ?3 B1<<?CK
1F?I<3J Starr Ro.anne 4ilt= and 0arry Dell$an- 59sync!ronous Learning Net+or)s as a Virtual 8lass-
roo$-6 ommunications of the A& ?' B1<<GCK ??I?<J Ro#ert 0. Ao=$a- 5Dill Hedia In%luence Learning@
Re%ra$ing t!e &e#ate-6 Educational Technology Research and /e(elopment ?2- no. 2 B1<<?CK GI1<J
S!u-S!eng Lia+- 5&esigning t!e 4y"er$edia-0ased Learning Eniron$ent-6 +nternational Journal of
+nstructional &edia 2F B2''1CK ?3I?;J Patric) Sullian- 5Gender &i%%erences and t!e Online 8lassroo$K
Hale and 2e$ale 8ollege Students Ealuate *!eir E."eriences-6 ommunity ollege Journal of Research
and Practice 2: B2''1CK F':I1F.
22. 0o+en and ot!ers- +nteracti(e 3earning )nline at Pu!lic 1ni(ersities Bsee note ;C- ". G.
23. *aylor and ot!ers- The /igital Re(olution and 4igher Education Bsee note ?C.
2?. 0aco+ and ot!ers- Barriers to Adoption of )nline 3earning Systems in 1.S. 4igher Education Bsee note 2C.
2:. Ro#ert H. 0ernard and ot!ers- 54o+ &oes &istance Education 8o$"are +it! 8lassroo$ Instruction@
9 Heta-9nalysis o% t!e E$"irical Literature-6 Re(ie" of Educational Research G? B2''?CK 3G<IF'.
2;. Dillia$ G. 0o+en and Aelly 9. Lac)- urrent Status of Research on )nline 3earning in Postsecondary
Education- re"ort "re"ared %or It!a)a SNR BNe+ /or)K It!a)a SNR- Hay 2'12C.
2G. Har) D. Li"sey and &aid 0. Dilson- 5*!e E%%icacy o% Psyc!ological- Educational- and 0e!aioral
*reat$ent-6 American Psychologist ?F B1<<3CK 11F1I2'<.
2F. 8lar)- 5Hedia Dill Neer In%luence Learning6 Bsee note 1FC.
2<. 0rad%ord S. 0ell and Stee D. 1. Ao=lo+s)i- 59ctie LearningK E%%ects o% 8ore *raining &esign Ele$ents on
Sel%-Regulatory Processes- Learning- and 9da"ta#ility-6 Journal of Applied Psychology <3 B2''FCK 2<;I31;.
3'. 0ernard and ot!ers- 54o+ &oes &istance Education 8o$"are +it! 8lassroo$ Instruction@6 Bsee note 2:C-
"". 3G<I?3<.
31. I#id.
32. *raci Sit=$ann and ot!ers- 5*!e 8o$"aratie E%%ectieness o% De#-0ased and 8lassroo$ InstructionK
9 Heta-9nalysis-6 Personnel Psychology :< B2'';CK ;23I;?. *!e aut!ors de%ine +e#-#ased instruction on
"". ;23I2?.
33. 0ar#ara Heans and ot!ers- E(aluation of E(idence-Based Practices in )nline 3earning0 A &eta-Analysis
and Re(ie" of )nline 3earning Studies- re"ort "re"ared %or t!e (.S. &e"art$ent o% Education- O%%ice
o% Planning- Ealuation- and Policy &eelo"$ent BDas!ingtonK (.S. &e"art$ent o% Education- Se"te$#er
2'1'C.
3?. *raci Sit=$ann- 59 Heta-9nalytic E.a$ination o% t!e Instructional E%%ectieness o% 8o$"uter-0ased
Si$ulation Ga$es-6 Personnel Psychology ;? B2'11CK ?F<I:2F.
3:. &aid N. 2iglio- Har) Rus!- and Lu /in- 5Is It Lie or Is It Internet@ E."eri$ental Esti$ates o% t!e
E%%ects o% Online Instruction on Student Learning.6 Dor)ing Pa"er 1;'F< B8a$#ridge- Hass.K National
0ureau o% Econo$ic Researc!- 1une 2'1'C.
3;. 0o+en and ot!ers- +nteracti(e 3earning )nline at Pu!lic 1ni(ersities Bsee note ;C.
3G. *erry 9nderson- 5Getting t!e Hi. Rig!t 9gainK 9n ("dated and *!eoretical Rationale %or Interaction-6
+nternational Re(ie" of Research in )pen and /istance 3earning ?- no. 2 B2''3CK 3.
3F. 0ro+n- 8!arlier- and Pierotti- 5E-learning at Dor)6 Bsee note :C- ". 1'F.
3<. Stee D. 1. Ao=lo+s)i and 0rad%ord S. 0ell- 59 *!eory-0ased 9""roac! %or &esigning &istri#uted
Learning Syste$s-6 in To"ard a Science of /istri!uted 3earning- edited #y Ste"!en H. 2iore and
Eduardo Salas BDas!ingtonK 9P9- 2''GC- "". 1:I3<.
?'. 1enni%er 1. Vogel and ot!ers- 58o$"uter Ga$ing and Interactie Si$ulations %or LearningK 9 Heta-
9nalysis-6 Journal of Educational omputing Research 3? B2'';CK 22<I?3.
?1. Hic!ael G. Hoore- 5*!ree *y"es o% Interaction-6 American Journal of /istance Education 3- no. 2 B1<F<CK
1I;.
?2. 9nderson- 5Getting t!e Hi. Rig!t 9gain-6 Bsee note 3GC.
?3. Ric!ard E. Hayer- 5Ele$ents o% a Science o% e-Learning-6 Journal of Educational omputing Research 2<
B2''3CK 2<GI313.
??. Ro#ert H. 0ernard and ot!ers- 59 Heta-9nalysis o% *!ree *y"es o% Interaction *reat$ents in &istance
Education-6 Re(ie" of Educational Research G< B2''<CK 12?3IF<.
?:. Din%red 9rt!ur 1r. and ot!ers- 5E%%ectieness o% *raining in Organi=ationsK 9 Heta-9nalysis o% &esign and
Ealuation 2eatures-6 Journal of Applied Psychology FF B2''3CK 23?I?:.
?;. 0aco+ and ot!ers- Barriers to Adoption of )nline 3earning Systems in 1.S. 4igher Education Bsee note 2C.
?G. 1ean (nder+ood and 9ttila S=a#o- 59cade$ic O%%ences and E-learningK Indiidual Pro"ensities in
8!eating-6 British Journal of Educational Technology 3? B2''3CK ?;F.
?F. Dillia$ 1. 0o+ers- Student /ishonesty and +ts ontrol in ollege BNe+ /or)K 8olu$#ia (niersity-
0ureau o% 9""lied Social Researc!- 1<;?C.
?<. &onald L. Hc8a#e and Linda A. *reino- 5Indiidual and 8onte.tual In%luences on 9cade$ic
&is!onestyK 9 Hultica$"us Inestigation-6 Research in 4igher Education 3F B1<<GCK 3G<I<;.
:'. Har) H. Lanier- 59cade$ic Integrity and &istance Learning-6 Journal of riminal Justice Education 1G
B2'';CK 2??I;1.
:1. Aristen Aennedy and ot!ers- 59cade$ic &is!onesty and &istance LearningK Student and 2aculty Vie+s-6
ollege Student Journal 3? B2'''CK 3'<I1:.
:2. Aennet! 1. 8!a"$an and ot!ers- 59cade$ic Integrity in t!e 0usiness Sc!ool Eniron$entK I,ll Get #y
+it! a Little 4el" %ro$ Hy 2riends-6 Journal of &ar,eting Education 2; B2''?CK 23;I?<.
:3. Goern$ent 9ccounta#ility O%%ice- For-Profit Schools0 E-periences of 1nderco(er Students Enrolled in
)nline lasses at Selected olleges BG9O-12-12:'C- re"ort "re"ared %or t!e 8!air$an- 8o$$ittee on
4ealt!- Education- La#or- and Pensions- (.S. Senate BG9O- Octo#er 2'11C.
:?. 0aco+ and ot!ers- Barriers to Adoption of )nline 3earning Systems in 1.S. 4igher Education Bsee note 2C.
::. &onald L. Hc8a#e- Linda A. *reino- and Aennet! &. 0utter%ield- 58!eating in 9cade$ic InstitutionsK 9
&ecade o% Researc!-6 Ethics and Beha(ior 3 B2''1CK 21<I32.
:;. Linda 9. 1ac)son- 5&igital &iides-6 in Encyclopedia of Adolescence- edited #y Roger 1. R. Lees3ue BNe+
/or)K S"ringer- 2'11C- "". G'1I1?.
:G. Instructional *ec!nology 8ouncil- Trends in E-learning Bsee note 1:C.
:F. 8arol 9. Saarella- 58o$"uter-0ased Instruction and Re$edial Hat!e$aticsK 9 Study o% Student
Retention at a 2lorida 8o$$unity 8ollege6 BP!& diss.- (niersity o% Sout! 2lorida- 2''FC.
:<. 2iglio- Rus!- and /in- 5Is It Lie or Is It Internet@6 Bsee note 3:C.
;'. S!anna S$it! 1aggars and *!o$as 0ailey- Effecti(eness of Fully )nline ourses for ollege Students0
Response to a /epartment of Education &eta-Analysis- re"ort "re"ared %or t!e 8o$$unity 8ollege
Researc! 8enter BNe+ /or)K *eac!ers 8ollege- 8olu$#ia (niersity- 1uly 2'1'C.
;1. *raci Sit=$ann and ot!ers- 59 Hultileel 9nalysis o% t!e E%%ect o% Pro$"ting Sel%-Regulation in
*ec!nology-&eliered Instruction-6 Personnel Psychology ;2 B2''<CK ;<GIG3?.
;2. 0aco+ and ot!ers- Barriers to Adoption of )nline 3earning Systems in 1.S. 4igher Education Bsee note 2C.
;3. I#id.
;?. I. Elaine 9llen and 1e%% Sea$an- lass /ifference:0 )nline Education in the 1nited States' #$2$' re"ort
"re"ared %or t!e 0a#son Surey Researc! Grou" BDellesley- Hass.K 0a#son Surey Researc! Grou"-
Noe$#er 2'1'C.
;:. 0o+en and ot!ers- +nteracti(e 3earning )nline at Pu!lic 1ni(ersities Bsee note ;C.
;;. 0aco+ and ot!ers- Barriers to Adoption of )nline 3earning Systems in 1.S. 4igher Education Bsee note 2C.
;G. *a$ara 0utler 0attaglino- Hatt 4alder$an- and Eleanor Laurans- 5*!e 8osts o% Online Learning-6 in
Education Reform for the /igital Era- edited #y 8!ester E. 2inn 1r. and &aniela R. 2airc!ild BDas!ingtonK
*!o$as 0. 2ord!a$ Institute- 2'12C- "". ::IG;.
;F. Sit=$ann- 59 Heta-9nalytic E.a$ination o% t!e Instructional E%%ectieness o% 8o$"uter-0ased Si$ulation
Ga$es6 Bsee note 3?C.
;<. 8aroline 4ayt!ornt!+aite- 5&igital &iide and E-Learning-6 in The Sage 4and!oo, of E-3earning
Research- edited #y Ric!ard 9ndre+s and 8aroline 4ayt!ornt!+aite B*!ousand Oa)s- 8ali%.K Sage- 2''GC-
"". <GI11F.