Is the future of education online?

Online learning is on the rise, as this recent story in the US News and World Report shows, although this is not without challenges. Is online learning the future of higher education? I believe so. Given the combination of increased time and life pressures faced by professionals today, improving technology for delivery of online programs and the cost-efficiencies for universities that shift to this format, I think online education will make strong gains in popularity over the next 10 years.

However, online learning and traditional classroom delivery of content have significant contrasts that both students and teachers need to wrestle with. I explore some of these differences below.

Differences between online and traditional learning

Online learning requires that students make a paradigm shift in order to be successful. There are many differences between online and traditional learning, but I focus below on three key ones that have implications for my academic success.

1. Social dynamics of computer-mediated learning

The computer mediated delivery of online learning, particularly its asynchronicity, affords great convenience and flexibility to working adults, but it also carries peculiar burdens. Traditional classrooms provide a form of face-to-face social connection, immediacy and sense of presence (between student and teacher, as well as among students) that is quite different from the social dynamics of the online classroom. Traditional learners may miss the characteristic social immediacy of the brick-and-mortar classroom and the interpersonal communication that it affords.

The traditional and online classroom present very different communication environments. Without proper care, the computer-mediated format can make communication in the online classroom seem impersonal at best and harsh at worst. While synchronous multimedia channels, such live video conferencing, can ameliorate some of this perceived online detachment, text-based asynchronous online learning platforms, such as group discussion boards, may accentuate them. Misunderstanding or even “flaming” may ensue because “online communicators are particularly prone to faulty assumptions because [it] excludes rich and significant cues on which people normally rely as information sources” (White, 2004, p. 44).

Fortunately, research suggests these challenges can be overcome and positive social dynamics can be forged in the online classroom (Cox & Cox, 2008). There are various strategies for preventing miscommunication and fostering psychosocial connection in the online classroom. For example, White (2004) suggests a communication approach based on warmth, responsiveness, inquisitiveness, tentativeness and empathy (the WRITE way), as well following proper netiquette (pp. 46-51).

Another important strategy good transition is the use of “communal scaffolding” and various Community Building Activities (CBAs) to provide a robust psychosocial support system in the online classroom (Woods & Ebersole, 2004). Helpful CBAs include mentorships, service learning/volunteering, and opportunities to interact with classmates and the teacher outside the requirements of the course module (e.g. by personal e-mail or phone).

2. Sage-on-the-stage vs. guide-on-your-side pedagogy

Another fundamental difference between online learning and face-to-face learning relates to the increased role of the virtual student to lead his/her own academic growth. Traditional classroom learning tends to lean towards a sage-on-the-stage pedagogy in which students may sometimes be spoon-fed with information. On the other hand, the guide-on-your-side approach of online instruction calls for self-regulated learning. According to Zimmerman (2001), “this approach views learning as an activity that students do for themselves in a proactive way, rather than as a covert event that happens to them reactively as a result of teaching experiences” (p. 1).

3. Pace and work demands

Online learning also differs from traditional classroom courses in pace and work demands. Online courses tend to incorporate a lot of reading to compensate for the lack of lectures (Baker, 2004, p. 36) and many are compressed and delivered over a shorter period of time than traditional classroom courses. This will require that students pursue their academic work with commitment and self-discipline. The heavy demands on the student’s time presents unique challenges that need to be handled with wisdom.

Several factors may account for the student’s success in handling the demands of online learning, but the single biggest determinant appears to be the source of their motivation. Compared to traditional learners, online students need stronger conative learning attributes, using their learning “as an intrinsic resource to achieve personal goals and satisfy personal needs” (Martinez, 2004, p. 67). This is confirmed by research by Rovai et al. (2007) suggesting that online learners have greater intrinsic motivation than traditional students. In practical terms, this means that the online student needs to have a clearly defined personal goal/vision that drives their academic efforts.

The online learning advantage

Notwithstanding the challenges of online learning, it provides significant opportunities to develop sound and competent scholars. In fact, online study may yield stronger value than on-campus courses, given the former’s constructionist approach to learning. As Lynch (2004) notes, “this [online learning] paradigm seems to be inherently more suited to producing deep understanding because it is based on the principle that learning must be personally constructed” (p. 141). 

References

Baker, J. D. (2004). A taxonomy of online courses. In K.W. White & J. D. Baker (Eds.), The student guide to successful online learning: A handbook of tips, strategies, and techniques. Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.

Cox, B., & Cox, B. (2008). Developing interpersonal and group dynamics through asynchronous
threaded discussions: The use of discussion board in collaborative learning. Education, 128(4), 553-565.

Lynch, M. M. (2004). Learning online: A guide to success in the virtual classroom. New York:
RoutledgeFalmer. Retrieved from http://www.questia.com

Martinez, M. (2004). Know thyself: Taking charge of your online learning. In K.W. White & J.
D. Baker (Eds.), The student guide to successful online learning: A handbook of tips, strategies, and techniques. Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.

Rovai, A., Ponton, M., Wighting, M., & Baker, J. (2007). A comparative analysis of student motivation in traditional classroom and e-learning courses. International journal on e-learning, 6(3), 413-432.

White, K. W. (2004). Communicating in the online classroom. In K.W. White & J. D. Baker
(Eds.), The student guide to successful online learning: A handbook of tips, strategies, and techniques. Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.

Woods, R. H., & Ebersole, S. (2004). Connecting for success in the online classroom. In K.W.
White & J. D. Baker (Eds.), The student guide to successful online learning: A handbook of tips, strategies, and techniques. Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.

Zimmerman, B. J. (2001). Theories of self-regulated learning and academic achievement: An
overview and analysis. In D. H. Schunk & B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theoretical Perspectives (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Retrieved from http://www.questia.com