Significance of e-learning in traditional classes.
Bahhouth, Jocelyne ; Bahhouth, Victor
INTRODUCTION
The advent of the Internet and the widespread adoption of advanced
technologies are among the major forces that helped the evolution of
online education in the academic world. The present challenge is to
identify the right tools and methods that should be used in the
e-Learning process; this requires that the evaluation process and
feedback be an integral part of the eLearning to leverage its
efficiencies and effectiveness.
Teaching online is still new in the field of education, where
Internet-based tools are the core to supplement e-teaching. In order to
integrate the right techniques, faculty need to identify new methods
that might not basically exist in traditional classes such as the use of
new technological innovations, teaching pedagogy, as well as new ways of
interaction between members of the class. Faculty members vary at
identifying the proper tools and the approach to follow when deciding on
which ones to follow to satisfy students' needs (Fang 2007).
Many studies have highlighted the significant impact of E-learning
on shaping the future education not only of online schools, but also of
traditional ones. In traditional classrooms, the instructor controls the
material and pace of learning. Cuban (1993) argued that instruction in
traditional classes is directed to the whole class, the pace of learning
is controlled by the teacher, and the curriculum is guided by the
textbook. However, in online classes, students are the center
(Hofstetter, 1998); students need to be motivated and proactive in the
learning process. In defining the frame of the E-learning platforms,
Papachristos et. al. (2010) argued that the students must be at the
center of their own learning (student-based learning) and that these
systems must be designed to facilitate their learning process. As
students are the center of the elearning process, it is of immense
importance to explore their perspective of the process.
The study highlights the importance of students' feedback as
students are the center of their own e-learning process. Students work
on their own pace in reading and studying the material, working the
assignments, taking tests, and submitting projects. They decide on the
level of interaction with their classmates as well as with their
professors. They are provided with the guidelines, tools and material
and they have to come up with plans on how to manage the way they study
and when. Based on that, their feedback is essential for the evaluation
of the elearning process. The study tests the significance of
traditional students' perception regarding efficiency of e-learning
as well as the effectiveness of some of the e-learning tools. The study
includes the following sections: 1- theoretical background section that
highlights the most relevant research in the field 2- testing hypotheses
section that defines research problems; 3research methodology section
which describes the research tools, data collection, data analysis,
limitation and implication of the study; and finally 5- conclusions and
recommendations section that summarizes the research output.
THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
The concept of e-learning is a part of the emerging theories of
adult education (Illeris , 2004) and lifelong learning (Kalogiannakis,
et. al., 2009). These theories focus on the differences between how the
adults learn compared to that of children (Whitehead, A., 1949;
Donavant, B., 2009; Griffin, C., 2006; Vrasidas, C. & Glass, G.,
2002). In the same direction, Knowles (1990) used the term
"andragogy" to refer to the principles of adult learning, as
opposed to the term "pedagogy", which describes child or
adolescent learning.
Evidently, many studies about e-learning have tackled this issue
from different perspectives. Topics covered many aspects of e-learning.
For example, Vrasidas C. & Glass G. (2002) argued that online
educational programs have increased adults' learning opportunities
by providing flexible space and time settings. Selvanathan and Cybinski
(2005) highlighted its indiscriminating effect, as it is available to
all people of different nationalities, ages, wealth, and races. However,
they added that to ensure effectiveness, online courses should be well
structured to encourage students to engage and interact to create a
motivating environment.
Cantoni et. al. (2004) stressed the added value of e-Learning to
improve retention, as it provides various types of content such as
images, sounds, videos and text work together. It also creates
interaction that engages the attention, such as games and quizzes.
Finally, it provides immediate feedback and encourages interaction with
other e-learners and e-instructors through chat rooms, discussion
boards, instant messaging and e-mails. Block et. al. (2008) emphasized
that online classes can be an acceptable alternative to traditional
lecture-based classes with regard to summative achievement.
Mason and Lefrere (2003) discussed the range of factors promoting
the adoption of elearning, its intensity, speed and identified the
enablers, which are the infrastructure; they include 1- Information
Communication Technology (ICT) infrastructure, 2- human talent to
specify, manage and support (i.e. a strong educational and training
base), 3- an ICT-literate population 4commercial infrastructure to
supply and service the ICT infrastructure, 5- and finally, the critical
influence of cultures. Cultural factors generally will influence
attitudes to modes of learning and the media used. Even when enablers
are identified, a widespread adoption of new technologies and practices
rarely happens unless there is minimal level of "literacy" in
relation to the new thing. "E-learning literacy" grows as
people and organizations become experienced in planning, implementing
and refining e-learning for their own specific needs.
Even there are several studies of courses in which grade
distributions determine the outcome measure that students do as well
through e-learning as they do in Face-to-Face (FTF) classes (Tata,
1999). Other studies show cyber-learners performing on assessments equal
to or better than FTF students (Human et.al., 2005).
On the other hand, even though e-learning is now well defined in
the education field and has earned credibility, few studies have dealt
with the e-learning major contributors, i.e. the students. Two of the
many questions that might be raised are the following: 1- How are
students likely to react to pedagogical changes? 2- How do students
perceive the benefit in key areas such as organization, critical
thinking, and interaction with each other and with their instructors, as
well as in oral and written communication skills? Evidently,
students' perception and feedback are important in the classical
learning environment, and e-learning should be no exception. The
students' feedback allows academicians to adjust, advance, and
ultimately succeed (Iryna & Concha, 2007). This paper assesses
students' perception of the benefits received from e-learning and
tests their significance; the tests include learning efficiencies in
different areas and the effectiveness of e-tools. There are two research
hypotheses, which are:
RESEARCH HYPOTHESES
The research questions of this study are two: 1- Is E-learning as
efficient as learning in tradition classes? and 2- Are E-learning tools
that are used in online classes effective?
METHODOLOGY
Research Instrument
The research instrument is made of two parts. In the first part,
students are asked to rate the learning efficiencies on a Likert scale
of 1 to 5, with 1 being strongly disagree and 5 strongly agree. Z
interval estimates and P-values are used to capture the learning
effectiveness (hypothesis 01), In the second part, students are asked to
assess the effectiveness of e-learning tools (i.e. pre-test/post-test in
each chapter, discussion forum, and submission of case reports) in four
areas, which are (a) analytical skills, (b) critical thinking, (c)
feedback, and (d) problemsolving skills. Z interval estimates and
P-value are used to test the significance of learning tools (hypothesis
02). In both parts, testing the significance is done using alphas of 1%,
5% and 10% (Hair et. al., 2004).
Measurement of Variables
The survey is made of two parts (Appendix A); in the first ten
questions, students are required to assess the online learning
effectiveness (Human et. al., 2005) with respect to written
communication, interaction with classmates, taking initiative, problem
solving, effective feedback, critical thinking, oral communications,
organizational abilities, analytical skills and interaction with tutors.
Students are required to use a 5-point likert scale; it ranges from
"strongly agree = 5" to "strongly disagree = 1".
In the second part, students are asked four questions related to
the effectiveness of online tools (Iryna & Concha, 2007). Students
are required to assess three online learning tools in terms of
analytical skills, critical thinking, feedback and problem solving
skills. These tools are pre-test /post- test, discussion forum, and case
study report. Students are required to label them as either "highly
effective", "effective", or "ineffective".
Sample and Data Collection
An anonymous online survey questionnaire was conducted among the
undergraduate students of technology enhanced classes
"Hybrid". A sample of 304 responses was collected during a
two-year-period which ended spring 2009.
Data Analysis
In the first part of the study, the learning effectiveness was
tested by using three levels of significance, which are extremely
significant ([alpha] = 1%), highly significant ([alpha] = 5%) and
significant ([alpha] = 10%). The summary output (Table 1) is as follows:
Table 1
Learning Effectiveness
Learning Aspects Mean STD n Z cal P value
Written Communications 3.16 2.00 300 1.36 8.00%
Interact with Classmates 3.11 1.04 290 1.73 4.00%
Taking Initiatives 3.02 1.32 299 0.21 42.80%
Problem Solving 3.10 0.98 300 1.73 4.00%
Effective Feedback 3.34 1.06 300 5.50 0.00%
Critical Thinking 3.16 0.94 285 2.90 0.90%
Oral Communications 3.05 1.04 285 0.80 31.00%
Organizational Abilities 3.17 0.87 287 3.30 0.01%
Analytical Skills 3.11 1.11 285 1.7 4.00%
Interaction with Tutors 3.42 1.02 287 7.01 0.00%
Learning Aspects Level of Significance
Written Communications Significant
Interact with Classmates Very Significant
Taking Initiatives Insignificant
Problem Solving Very Significant
Effective Feedback Extremely Significant
Critical Thinking Extremely Significant
Oral Communications Insignificant
Organizational Abilities Extremely Significant
Analytical Skills Very Significant
Interaction with Tutors Extremely Significant
The null hypothesis was rejected in eight different learning
aspects; results clearly show that students perceive that the e-learning
is efficient as traditional classes, as it improved their written
communication, interaction with classmates, critical thinking,
organizational ability, and interaction with the tutor. However, two
items showed insignificant results and accordingly failed to reject H0;
these were taking initiatives and oral communications. The
insignificance of these two aspects reflects a drawback of e-Learning,
as there is no face-to-face contact with the instructors, which need to
be compensated in other areas.
In the second stage, e-learning tools were tested. Students were
asked to rank the significance of three online teaching tools in the
development of their analytical, critical thinking, feedback, and
problem solving skills. Detailed results are shown in Table 2.
Pre-test/post-test was ranked as an extremely effective tool (43%),
followed by online discussion forum (31%), and then case study reports.
In testing the significance of the results, the responses were
reclassified into two groups--Effective versus ineffective. The P value
of the three tools was computed; table 3 detailed the results:
Table 3
Significance of Teaching Tools
Proportion Zcal P value
Pre/Post Test 67% 11.59 0.0%
Online Discussion Forum 74% 16.45 0.0%
Case Study Report 59% 6.07 0.0%
Significance
Pre/Post Test Extremely significant
Online Discussion Forum Extremely significant
Case Study Report Extremely significant
The null hypothesis was rejected for the three e-tools; e-tools
were perceived by students as extremely effective tools (a of 1%);
P-value of the three tools was less than 1%. This reflects the unique
feature of e-learning, where online tools are in the core process;
unlike the traditional classes, where the main coefficient of learning
effectiveness is given to the faculty.
IMPLICATIONS
The study showed evidence that traditional students'
perception of e-learning is as efficient as that of traditional classes;
it improved their written skills, organizational ability and critical
thinking. Nonetheless, it highlighted two major drawbacks; the first one
is that e-learning doesn't prompt students to take initiative, and
the second one is that e-learning failed to promote oral communication.
While on the other hand, students recognized the effectiveness of the
three e-learning tools, which are pre/post test, online discussion, and
case study report. As the students are the focus of e-learning, it is
important to get their feedback to identify both weaknesses and
strengths of e-learning so as to work out plans to avoid weaknesses and
capitalize on strengths.
LIMITATIONS
Limitations of the study are set into the following points. 1- The
survey used a primary type based on students' perception, which is
an expression of personal opinion. 2-The sample size is small compared
to the target population. 3- The E-learning tools included in the study
were limited to three only. 4- The external validity of the test was not
addressed.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The output result of the study is robust, as it provides feedback
about students' perception about e-learning that could be used as a
guideline in designing online courses. E-learning is all about how to
use technology to enhance the outcome to make it as effective as
traditional learning. It is recommended to conduct future studies to
include samples taken from different universities and time frames to
address the external validity of the test; in addition, it is necessary
to evaluate e-learning efficiencies with the introduction of the new
technological innovations of e-learning tools. As in designing
e-learning environments, the approach should be one that provides
appreciation for multiple perspectives, embedded learning in relevant
contexts and that encourages the use of multiple representation modes,
while encouraging self awareness of the knowledge construction process.
Furthermore, the e-learning process should be continuously monitored and
improved based on students' feedback. E-learning is the most
successful when it cultivates an atmosphere of cooperative learning
among students and teachers, utilizes dynamic, generative learning
activities that promote level thinking processes (i.e. analysis,
synthesis, problem solving, experimentation and creativity among many
other), and assesses student progress in learning through realistic
tasks and performances.
Appendix A
SIGNIFICANCE OF E-LEARNING IN TRADITIONAL CLASSES--SURVEY
PART A: Please indicate your degree of agreement--disagreement with
the following statements regarding online learning effectiveness by
putting a check mark (V) in the appropriate cell.
Efficiency of Strongly
E-Learning Disagree 1 Disagree 2 Neutral 3
Written Communications
Interact with Classmates
Taking Initiatives
Problem Solving
Effective Feedback
Critical Thinking
Oral Communications
Organizational Abilities
Analytical Skills
Interaction with Tutors
Efficiency of Strongly
E-Learning Agree 4 Agree 5
Written Communications
Interact with Classmates
Taking Initiatives
Problem Solving
Effective Feedback
Critical Thinking
Oral Communications
Organizational Abilities
Analytical Skills
Interaction with Tutors
PART B: Please rank the significance of three contributory
E-learning tools in the development of your analytical, critical
thinking, feedback, and problem solving skills. Indicate your degree of
agreement--disagreement by putting a check mark (V) in the appropriate
cell.
Analytical Skills Ineffective Effective Extremely Effective
Pre/Post Test
Online Discussion Forum
Case Study Report
Critical Thinking Skills Ineffective Effective Extremely Effective
Pre/Post Test
Online Discussion Forum
Case Study Report
Feedback Ineffective Effective Extremely Effective
Pre/Post Test
Online Discussion Forum
Case Study Report
Problem-Solving Skills Ineffective Effective Extremely Effective
Pre/Post Test
Online Discussion Forum
Case Study Report
THANK YOU FOR COMPLETING THE SURVEY!
REFERENCES
Block, A. , Udermann, B., Felix, M., Reineke, D., & Murray, S.
R. (2008).Achievement and Satisfaction in an Online versus a Traditional
Health and Wellness Course. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 4
(1), 57-65.
Cantoni, V., Cellario, M., & Porta, M. (2004). Perspectives and
challenges in e-learning: towards natural interaction paradigms. Journal
of Visual Languages and Computing, 15(5), 333345.
Cuban, L. (1993), How Teachers Taught (2nd ed.), Teachers College
Press, New York.
Donavant, B. (2009). The New, Modern Practice of Adult Education:
Online Instruction in a Continuing Professional Education Setting, Adult
Education Quarterly, 59 (3), 227-245.
Fang, B. (May 2007). A Performance-Based Development Model for
Online faculty. Performance Improvement, 46, 5.
Griffin, C. (2006). Research and Policy in Life-Long Learning.
International Journal of Lifelong Education, 25,6.
Hofstetter, H., & Fred, T. (1998). Cognitive versus Behavioral
L Psychology. Available: http://www.udel/edu/fth/pbs/webmodel.htm (2004,
February 25).
Hair J., Anderson, R., Tatham, R., & Black, W. (2004).
Multivariate Data Analysis, 7th edition, Prentice Hall.
Human, S. E.; Clark, T., & Baucus, M. S. (February 2005).
Student Online Self-assessment: Structuring Individual-level Learning in
a New Venture Creation Course. Journal of Management Education, 29 (1),
111-134.
Illeris, K. (ed. 2004). Adult Education and Adult Learning,
Malabar, Florida: Krieger. also published by Roskilde University Press,
2004.
Iryna, P., & Concha, N. (2007). Differences in Characteristics
of Online versus Traditional Students: Implications for Target
Marketing. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 17 (1), 49-65, 17.
Kalogiannakis, M., Alafodimos, C., Vassilakis, K., Papachristos, D.
Papadakis, S., & Zafeiri, E. (November 2009). Adult Education and
Lifelong Learning: A Greek Case Study. International Journal of Advanced
Corporate Learning (iJAC), 2, 4.
Knowles, M. (1990). The Adult Learner: A neglected species,
Houston: Gulf, 1990.
Mason, J., & Lefrere, P. (Dec 2003). Trust, collaboration,
e-learning and organizational transformation. International Journal of
Training & Development; 7(4), 259-270.
Papachristos, D., Alafodimos, N., Arvanitis, K., Vassilakis, K.,
Kalogiannakis, M., Kikilias, P., & Zafeiri E., (February 2010), An
Educational Model for Asynchronous E-Learning. A case study in Higher
Technology Education. International Journal of Corporate Learning, 3,1.
Selvanathan, S., & Cybinski, P. (2005). 'Learning
Experience and Learning Effectiveness in Undergraduate Statistics:
Modelling Performance in Traditional versus Flexible Learning
Environments, Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 3 (2),
251-271.
Tata, J. (May 1999). Grade Distributions, Grading Procedures, and
Students' Evaluations of Instructors: A Justice Perspective.
Journal of Psychology, 133 (3), 263.
Vrasidas C., & Glass, G. (2002). A conceptual framework for
studying distance education, Distance education and distributed
learning, pp.31-56, 2002, Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
Whitehead, A. (1949) The aims of education and other essays, New
York: New American Library.
About the Authors:
Bahhouth Jocelyne is Chair of the Department of Humanities and
Social Sciences at Bladen Community College, NC where she teaches
English. She is also an adjunct Associate Professor at University of
Maryland University College, MD. She holds a Ph.D. in ESL (English as a
Second Language), an M.A. in Education, a B.A. in English Literature and
a Teaching Diploma in TEFL (Teaching English as a Foreign Language). Her
publications appeared in refereed journals as well as in the proceedings
of international conferences. She has recently published a book entitled
Spoken Lebanese, which teaches the Lebanese dialect. This book uses
English as the language of instruction is being translated into four
languages.
Bahhouth Victor is an Associate Professor of Finance at the
Department of Economics, Finance, and Decision Sciences--University of
North Carolina--Pembroke. He received his Doctorate of Business
Administration in Finance from Newcastle Business School, University of
Newcastle Upon Tyne--United Kingdom. His research interests are in the
areas of contemporary issues related to international businesses,
technology, and stock markets. He authored and co-authored research
papers that have been published in refereed journals and in the
proceedings of national and international academic conferences. Dr.
Bahhouth received research awards for a number of papers presented at
scholarly conferences and chaired sessions, served as a discussant. In
addition, Dr. Bahhouth is a Certified Public Accountant (CPA) and
Certified Management Accountant (CMA).
Maysami, Ramin Cooper is professor and chair of the department of
economics, finance and decision sciences in the School of Business at
the University of North Carolina at Pembroke. His areas of research are
regulation of financial institutions, interest-free banking and finance,
entrepreneurship, and most recently online learning. His publications
have appeared in academically refereed journal as well as
professional/practitioners journals. Dr. Maysami's regular teaching
schedule includes courses in Personal Finance, Entrepreneurship and
Entrepreneurship Finance, Financial Institutions, and Microeconomics.
Jocelyne Bahhouth
Bladen Community College--Dublin
Victor Bahhouth
Ramin Cooper Maysami
University of North Carolina--Pembroke
Table 2
Teaching Tools
Extremely
Effective Effective Ineffective Total
Pre/Post Test 43% 24% 33% 100%
Online Discussion Forum 31% 43% 26% 100%
Case Study Report 19% 39% 41% 100%
