STUDENTS IN HIGHER EDUCATION: DISTANT LEARNING VS ...

STUDENTS IN HIGHER EDUCATION: DISTANT LEARNING VS. FRONTAL LECTURES Avikam Gazette, Open University of Israel , Israel Niva Wallenstein, Open University of Israel, Israel Tali Heiman, Open University of Israel, Israel

Summary The main aim of this study was to asses and to compare the attitudes and satisfaction of university students toward two different teaching-learning systems they were involved in. One system is the traditional teacher-student meeting at classroom and the other is the distance learning by mean of communication technologies The Open University's "Ofek" project is a recent example of synchronous tutorial distance learning The research included 49 students, who took at least one advanced "Ofek" on-line class. All students are in an advanced stage of their studies in the field of social studies Independent one-sample t-test suggests that students would rather prefer studying through "Ofek", t (49) = 3.81; p< 0.01. Regarding frontal tutorials, students pointed out that the quality of teaching is not standardized and they were stress about succeeding in taking notes

The main aim of this study was to asses and to compare the attitudes and satisfaction of university students toward two different teaching-learning systems they were involved in. One system is the traditional teacher-student meeting at classroom and the other is the distance learning by mean of communication technologies. Introduction The dynamics of globalization, plus the introduction of information and communication technologies (ICT), resulted in a tidal wave of information that has, in many cases, overwhelmed many countries around the world in the last few decades. This has resulted in radical changes in the educational needs of individuals and society at large, and is reflected in looking for new and effective methods of teaching-learning interactions. ( Ojo & Olakulehin, 2006).Unlike conventional educational delivery methods, there are no structured face-to-face contacts between the students and the teachers. Instead, high quality, selfdirected, learner-centered instructional materials are made available to students. The term ‘Distance Education’ refers to an educational approach in which there is a quasi separation of the learner and the teacher in time and space (Keegan 1996). In distance

education, the instructor and the instructional strategy/ methods are subsumed into the learning material (popularly referred to as Study Materials), that have been designed as a self-directed learning guide for the student. The term ‘Open Learning,’ on the other hand, refers to the philosophical construct that seeks to remove barriers and constraints that may prevent learners from accessing and succeeding in quality, lifelong education. (Ojo & Olakulehin, 2006) The first generation of distance learning, using traditional printed material and communication via post and telephone, was substituted by second generation audio recordings, radio and television broadcasts. These two waves of distance learning emphasized learning materials and did not pay attention to the absence of interactive communication between students and lecturers (katz, 2002) Bonk & Dennen, (In Rosenthal,2007) arranged 10 levels of Web Integration:

1.

Levels of Web Integration Syllabus via the Web

Student exploration of Web resources Student-generated resources 3. published on the Web Course resources on the Web 4. 2.

Web resources 5. Substantive and graded Web 6. activities

7.

8.

Course activities beyond class

extending

Web as alternate delivery system for resident students

Description Instructors use the Web to promote course and teaching ideas via electronic fliers and syllabuses. Students use the Web to explore pre-existing resources, both in and outside class. Students use the Web to generate resources and products for class. Instructors use the Web to create and present class resources such as handouts, prior student work, class notes and PowerPoint presentations. Instructors take Web resources and course activities from one course and adapt them to another. Students participate with peers in web-based activities such as weekly articles or debates as a graded part of their course requirements. Students are required to work or communicate with peers, practitioners, teachers, and/or experts outside the course, typically via computer conferencing. Local students with scheduling or other conflicts use the Web as a primary means of course participation, while participating in some live course meetings. Students from any location around the world may participate in a course offered entirely on the Web.

Entire course conducted on 9. the Web for students located anywhere Course fits within larger Instructors and administrators embed WBC 10. programmatic Web Initiative development within the larger programmatic initiatives of their institution.

The third generation of distance learning includes interactive video, email, chat and other web technologies. These ways of communicating offer new channels for teacher-student interaction. Interaction by online internet-based instruction or by video-conferencing

produces real-time situations of learning. It meats the cognitive needs and requirements of students (Wilson &Whitlock,1997) The Internet and a new generation of educational computer programs have turned computeraided learning to a quality and dynamic learning method, which lacks any constraints of time or place (Stephenson, 2001). Synchronous computerized communication enables fast responses, lectures, demonstrations or ever real- time frontal lessons (Beyth- Marom, Saporta & Caspi, 2005). Such ways of distance learning brings to positive change in the teaching-learning processes comparing with earlier distance learning systems.(Yablon & Katz, 2001, Wilson & Whitlock, 1997).The inclusion of new information and communication technology with the traditional student-teacher interaction by these new means contribute also to student achievement ( Trentin,1997). Student attitudes are also changing. Distance learning used to be a last resort for people who couldn't attend college or university. Distance learning also has a special attraction for students with physical disabilities. These students find themselves on an equal footing with other students with whom they can communicate over the e-mail and internet. ( Nicholls,1997).

A blind student participated last year in my Web distance course. She heard my lecture at home and told me later that she felt like being at class observing my face. Beyond the excitement her words emphasized the power of this tool of distance learning. Some years ago I had similar experience with another blind student who participated in group observing me on large T.V. screen. He heard my lecture and even answered my questions. No body in the other classes had any idea he was blind… Distance learning removes barriers to learning, whether they are concerned with time, place or space. Individual learners take responsibility for what they learn, how they learn, where they learn, in what rate they learn helps then and when they are assessed. A study done by Ojo & Olakulehin ( 2006) assessed the attitudes and perceptions of distance teaching and learning by students enrolled in open and distance

instructions,

compared to their experiences at conventional universities. Results of the study showed that students generally have a positive perception and attitude towards open and distance learning, compared to traditional forms of higher education. Another study (Katz, 2002) examined psychological aspects of the use of distance learning technologies by university students. The results showed that psychological attitudes held by students differentially facilitate effective use of distance learning approaches. Satisfaction

with learning, level of control of the learning process, and study motivation for distance learning are all positively related to the students' preferences for structured distance learning. On the other hand, independence in learning is positively connected to students' preferences for the more open Internet functionality. Main Body The Open University's "Ofek" project is a recent example of this synchronous tutorial. In this project, the teacher is video- photographed in the University studio, and the on- line lesson is transmitted through a satellite and broadcasted to a class and/ or to the students' homes. Students may observe broadcasting in real time communicating by means of chat or phone, or may observe the record when ever they need to. In this case the students' choice is between structured on line distance learning and more open use of a-synchronic records. In Semester 2009a, 3078 students participated in 47 different courses with 132,436 hours of observations .These hours were distributed to 14 of live broadcasting observation, 55% broadcasting records observation and 31% other records observation.

Average observation of all students at all records during semester 2009a

(Open University of Israel, internal unpublished report, 2009) Method This study examined students' satisfaction in fully on-line distant course in comparison to those who take only frontal course. The research included 49 students, who took at least one advanced "Ofek" on-line class. All students are in an advanced stage of their studies in the field of social studies. The students

were asked to fill out a position questionnaire via the e- mail (Dewhurst, Macleod and Norris, 2000). Results Differences in students' attitudes and satisfaction: "Ofek" on line vs. frontal learning: Agree

Do not agree (%)

1. I prefer "Ofek" instead frontal

59.2

40.8

2. "Ofek" as substitute to to frontal

79.6

20.4

3. "Ofek" satisfy learning needs

75.5

24.5

4.

"Ofek" enables same information

85.7

14.3

5.

"Ofek" efficient as same as frontal

59.2

40.8

6.

"Ofek" is not substitute to frontal

71.4

28.6

7.

"Ofek" is not good enough as frontal

81.6

18.4

8.

"Ofek" additional to frontal

61.2

38.8

9.

I wish all courses by "Ofek"

57.1

42.9

Differences in contributing factors (scale from 1-none to 5-very much): "Ofek"

Frontal

1. Time and place choosing

4.2

2.1

2. Flexible learning

4.1

2.6

3. Learning in my own rate

3.8

2.5

Independent one-sample t-test suggests that students would rather prefer studying through "Ofek", t (49) = 3.81; p< 0.01. Independent one sample t-test suggests also that students benefit learning supporting factors, when studying through "Ofek", t(49) = 9.35; p< 0.001 Conclusion Regarding frontal tutorials, students pointed out that the quality of teaching is not standardized and they were stress about succeeding in taking notes. Nonetheless, in frontal teaching they feel they get more chances to ask questions. Students noted that "Ofek" facilitated learning at one's own rate, and the learning flexibility at a convenient time and place. Students with less then average grades prefer frontal lectures inasmuch as "Ofek" tutorials.

Research findings suggested that although most students in advanced courses prefer learning via "Ofek" teaching method and see it as a better alternative to frontal lessons; they (57%) do not wish that each and every class offered by the Open University would be by "Ofek". More researches on larger scale are needed in the future as to strengthen results and to look for additional factors influence learning environment in distance learning systems.

References Beyth-Marom, R., Saporta, K., & Caspi, A. (2005.) Synchronous vs. asynchronous tutorials: Factors affecting students' preferences and choices. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 37 (3), 245-262. Dewhurst, D.G., Macleod, H. A., Norris, T. A.M. (2000). Independent student learning aided by computers: An acceptable alternative to lectures? Computers & Education, 35, 223241. Katz, Y.J.(2002). Attitudes affecting college students' preferences for distance learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18 (1), 2-9. Keegan, D. (1996). Foundations of Distance Education (3rd ed.). London: Routledge. Nicholls, A. (1997). Higher Education: Distance Learning. The Guardian. Manchester(UK), Jan21. Nipper, S. (1989).Third generation distance learning and computer conferencing in R. Mason and A. Kaye (Eds.), Mind- wave: Communication, computers and distance education. Pergamon, Oxford, UK. Ojo, D.O., Olakulehin, F.K. (2006).Attitudes and Perceptions of Students to Open and Distance Learning in Nigeria. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 7 (1),1-11. Rosenthal, I. (2007) Learning to Teach Mathematics through a Web-Based Course. Submitted to the University of Sussex in fulfillment of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy,, University of Sussex.

Stephenson, J. (2001).Teaching and learning online: New pedagogies for new technologies. London: Routledge.

Swan, K. (2001).Building learning communities in online courses: The importance of

interaction. Paper presented at the 7th Sloan-C International Conference of Online Learning, Orlando, Fl. Trenin, G. (1997) Telematics and on-line teacher training: the POLARIS project. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 13, 261-270. Wilson, T. & Whitelock, D. (1997 ). Monitoring a CMC environment created for distance learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 13. 261-270 Yblon, Y. B. & Katz, Y. J. (2001).Internet-based group relations: a high school peace education project in Israel. Educational Media International, 38, 2/3, 175-182.