Online learning, for students and teachers, seems to be one of the fastest growing trends in educational uses of technology, especially when considering data from the last decade. According to the National Center for Education Statistics, the number of K-12 public school students enrolling in a technology-based distance education course grew by 65% from 2002 to 2005. In the 2007-2008 school year, it was estimated that more than a million K-12 students took online courses.
While online learning may not be the best fit for everyone, it is an alternative option. The one-size-fits-all approach that currently predominates our classrooms is no longer the answer, not if our students are all expected to be prepared for the 21st century. The personalization of content that online learning allows could make a big difference for some students by allowing them to progress at their own level and pace. Online education could be well suited for the students who might otherwise drop out of school, the athletes that regularly miss class due to sporting events, the bored but gifted student who just needs to be challenged, and the students with special needs of all types. Online learning can help all these students study, advance, and learn at their own pace (Zinny, 2013).
After reviewing the literature, it was found that one of the most basic characteristics for classifying online activities is its objective. Some online learning activities serve as a replacement for face-to-face instruction (virtual courses), while others serve as an enhancement of the face-to-face learning experience (activities that are in addition to the face-to-face activities) (Means, Toyama, Murphy, Bakia, & Jones, 2010). According to the research, the success of these two objectives is evaluated differently. Online learning, used as a replacement for face-to-face instruction, is considered to be successful if it provides learning online without sacrificing student achievement. If student outcomes are found to be the same whether the course is taken online or face-to-face, then online learning can be used as a cost-effective method in situations where there are not enough students to warrant an on-site instructor, such as is often the case in rural schools or for students in specialized courses (Means, Toyama, Murphy, Bakia, & Jones, 2010). However, in contrast, online enhancement activities that produce learning outcomes equivalent to, but not better than, those resulting from face-to-face instruction alone was considered to be a waste of time and money because the addition did not show improvement in student learning outcomes (Means, Toyama, Murphy, Bakia, & Jones, 2010).
A second important characteristic for classifying online learning was the type of learning experience. The literature focused on three types of learning: expository instruction, active learning, and interactive learning. In the traditional or expository learning experiences, the content is delivered to the students through lectures, written materials, or other mechanisms (Means, Toyama, Murphy, Bakia, & Jones, 2010). In active learning experiences, the student has control of what and how he or she learns, through online drills, simulations, games, and other inquiry-based manipulations (Means, Toyama, Murphy, Bakia, & Jones, 2010). In collaborative or interactive learning experiences, the content is "emergent as learners interact with one another, the teacher, and other knowledge sources as well" (Means, Toyama, Murphy, Bakia, & Jones, 2010, p. 3). In this instance, the teacher acts more as a facilitator, while the students interact with one another and the technology.
The third characteristic used to classify online learning was the extent to which the learning was synchronous or asynchronous. Online learning that is synchronous refers to instruction "occurring in real time, whether it is in a physical place or a virtual place" (Means, Toyama, Murphy, Bakia, & Jones, 2010, p. 4). Online learning that is asynchronous refers to instruction with a "time lag between the presentation of instructional stimuli and student responses" (Means, Toyama, Murphy, Bakia, & Jones, 2010, p. 4).
Along with the three main characteristics listed above, there were many other features that also applied to online learning. These included the type of setting (classroom, home, informal), the nature of the content (subject area, type of learning), and the technology involved (audio/video streaming, podcasting, simulations, videoconferencing, screen sharing) (Means, Toyama, Murphy, Bakia, & Jones, 2010).
Online learning, defined as learning that takes place partially or entirely over the Internet, is often associated with the following myths that are used to criticize this form of instruction.
- Myth # 1: Online learning will reduce the need for teachers. This is not the case, however, because "surveys and interviews have come to show that the number one reason for student success, either in a classroom or online, is a caring teacher or instructor" (Ebersole, 2012, para. 3). Also, data shows that online classes are often more strict about class sizes than traditional classes, setting a maximum of 20 to 25 students per section, thereby creating the need for more qualified teachers, not fewer (Ebersole, 2012).
- Myth # 2: All online courses are the same. Again, this is not the case. The courses vary from one end of the spectrum to the other, meaning that some formats are text-heavy electronic correspondence courses, while others are courses full of color, graphics, animation, and simulations (Ebersole, 2012). Some online courses even offer "capstone assessments that can test a student’s ability to apply concepts and make decisions based on what they have learned" (Ebersole, 2012, para. 4). While these are not cheap, they are engaging and effective measurements of student growth (Ebersole, 2012).
- Myth # 3: The quality of outcomes is less for an online student than for one who has received the same instruction in a classroom. Decades of research has proven this to be a false statement. In fact, it has found that the outcomes for those studying at a distance do not differ from those in a classroom (Ebersole, 2012). Contrary to what some believe, students do not have to be watched like a hawk in order to learn.
- Myth # 4: You do not know if the person doing the work is the person receiving the credit. This same argument can be made about any type of learning. It is not unique to online learning alone (Ebersole, 2012). Even students in regular classroom settings can turn in work they either copied from someone else or that someone else did for them. This issue can occur in any educational setting.
We cannot let myths such as these hold us back. Our focus should be on student learning and achievement and what works best for the individual student. Online learning has the power to advance our society when used appropriately and with students who will benefit from this type of learning. Online learning is not for everyone, so careful thought and consideration should be given when determining whose needs can best be served by this type of learning.
Overall, the available research concerning online learning suggests the following:
- Promoting self-reflection, self-regulation, and self-monitoring leads to more positive online learning outcomes (Means, Toyama, Murphy, Bakia, & Jones, 2010).
- Students who learn in online groups provide scaffolds for one another (Means, Toyama, Murphy, Bakia, & Jones, 2010).
- Online learning studies, of the effects of individualizing instruction, found positive effects for students (Means, Toyama, Murphy, Bakia, & Jones, 2010).
- Tools or features prompting students to reflect on their learning were effective in improving outcomes (Means, Toyama, Murphy, Bakia, & Jones, 2010).
- The effects of including different types of online simulations were modestly positive (Means, Toyama, Murphy, Bakia, & Jones, 2010).
- Although it is generally recommended that online learning use instructors or other adults as online moderators, research support for the effect of this practice on student learning was mixed (Means, Toyama, Murphy, Bakia, & Jones, 2010).
Online learning is quickly growing, but despite its popularity, online learning continues to be seen in a negative light by some. The thing to keep in mind, however, is that online learning is not for everyone. Students should consider what is best for their learning needs and for the ones who decide that “online classrooms” are not for them, there will still be the “brick and mortar classrooms” for them to attend.
References
Ebersole, J. (2012, August). The myths of online learning. Forbes. Retrieved from http://www.forbes.com/sites/johnebersole/2012/08/24/the-myths-of-online-learning/
Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M., & Jones, K. (2010). Evaluation of evidence- based practices in online learning: A meta-analysis and review of online learning studies. U.S. Department of Education. Office of Planning, Evaluation, and Policy Development. Policy and Program Studies Service. ED-04-CO-0040. Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/tech/evidence-based-practices/finalreport.pdf
Zinny, G. (2013, November 8). Is online learning transforming education? Huffington Post. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gabriel-sanchez-zinny/ron-packards-education-fo_b_4219682.html
No comments:
Post a Comment