A Review of Research on Teaching Online - csessums.com

I was recently handed an article from a recent Review of Educational Research (Spring 2006) that focused on teaching courses online. This article is a literature review covering online education, Internet courses, distance teaching and learning, and Web-based instruction. A total of 76 studies are cited with a fair mix of quantitative and qualitative research. I had a feeling I would be in for a bumpy ride when the authors immediately reported complications in their analysis due to inconsistencies in terminology (e.g., is an online course a World Wide Web course, or an Internet course, or a computer-based course, or a cyberspace course, etc.).

This review uncovers several contradictory findings about the best way to conduct teaching and learning online. The findings suggest that what works for one set of students, doesn?t work for another group with often little to no accounting for these inconsistencies. For example, one study showed how well asynchronous discussions ?mimicked the dynamics of real-time multivoiced discussions,? while another study observed that they provide a ?lack of fluidity and conversational language? (p. 96).

Another interesting finding suggested the importance of recognizing students? feelings, reactions, and responses in an online environment. At first after reading this observation I was struck by how odd it sounded. I have attended college courses off and on for over 10 years and I have trouble recalling students? feelings ever being openly considered in class by a professor. I have seen professors recognize and respond to students? reactions and responses, but never a student?s feelings. Is it because college classes are places where the focus is primarily on an objective reality as opposed to a subjective one? A place where students? feelings are considered inappropriate and therefore not an issue? I?m not quite sure what to make of this finding.

What I found lacking in the research are repeated studies. It seems a study is conducted once with n number of subjects in a specific content area, and out of this, claims are being made, best practices are being defined. Is a sample of 400 professors adequate and representative of the entire professorate population? In my mind, this does not serve the discipline of academic or sociological research well. Before claims of what works best are made, it would seem studies need to show reliable and valid results over repeated trials. Perhaps because online teaching and learning is a relatively new endeavor, there hasn?t been enough time to gather good data. In the meantime, professors need tenure, so they will publish their research regardless of its merit (Ouch! Did I say that?).

Also worth noting is the amount of time researchers spend comparing elements of online courses with face to face courses. Isn?t this like comparing apples to oranges? How much coding of dialogue takes place when researchers evaluate face-to-face courses? What does such an analysis reveal? If it?s depth or complexity or levels of engagement, doesn?t that have more to do with the course facilitator and the course design? Should we be studying which personality types make better instructors/facilitators? And what would such findings lead to? Firing all instructors who have inconsistent or inappropriate teaching personalities? Wow, what a concept! (Would that be a good thing or a bad thing?).

To no surprise, the article reports ?no comprehensive theory or model that informed studies of online instruction? (p. 115).? Most instructors or designers simply move text-based courses to the Internet following some form of pedagogy/androgogy and there are very few studies that examine this phenomenon. Perhaps it is wise to ask if there are any special guidelines needed? Is this another matter of personality wherein good instructors/facilitators follow basic pedagogical assumptions and then tweak them over time adjusting for the various assignments and levels of engagement? Would guidelines as such stifle creativity or provide support weaker instructors?

Without going into greater detail, the article provides a helpful stepping off point for exploring various aspects of teaching and learning online as well as differing aspects of online learning environments worth considering. Ultimately literature reviews of this type provide researchers opportunities to explore what?s happening in a particular field and often points the way to future research possibilities. As such, anybody studying distance education or online learning will probably find the bibliography and appendices quite helpful on a variety of levels.

?

Reference:
Tallent-Runnels, M.K., et al. (2006). Teaching courses online: A review of research. Review of Educational Research. 76(1): 93-135.

Originally posted?June 05, 2006

Source: http://www.csessums.com/2012/08/14/a-review-of-research-on-teaching-online/

kevin kolb