Academic Exchange Quarterly Winter 2006 ISSN 1096-1453 Volume 10, Issue 4
To cite, use print source rather than this on-line version which may not reflect print copy format requirements or text lay-out and pagination.
On-Line Courses: Recommendations for Teachers
Horng-Ji Lai, Graduate Institute of Adult and Continuing Education, National Chi-Nan University, Puli, Taiwan
Horng-Ji Lai, Ph.D. is an assistant
professor of Adult and Continuing Education at National Chi-Nan
The purpose of this study was
to examine the problems that learners faced while dealing with
instructor-related issues when taking on-line courses. In this study, fifteen graduate students
enrolled in 5 on-line graduate courses using course management software. The findings showed that lack of feedback
from the instructors, their unfamiliarity with the tea
The rapid development of Internet technology
has made a significant impact on how instruction is delivered in higher
education (HE). Most colleges and universities are eager to offer some form of Web-based
instruction in order to utilize the advantages of this technology. Accordingly, faculty members are expected to create
instruction does not produce acceptable results, researchers have found that inadequate
training of the instructors is one of the main factors contributing to that
failure. (Fly, 1998; Galusha; 1998). Kerr’s
research (2005) also indicated that the confidence and preparedness of
teachers and the motivation of students are the most influential elements
affecting on-line learning
outcomes. Instructors, therefore, need to engage with
this new format of tea
In essence, learning involves two
types of interactions – interaction with learning content and interaction with
other people (Berge, 1995). On-line
instructors, especially, need to pay attention to these features, that is,
designing content with appropriate interactivity and promoting communication
and collaboration among learners. Miller
(2001) asserted that students have not embraced this new medium of
instruction to the extent that it was originally hoped because instructors have
not been fully aware of the importance of these two issues when designing
on-line courses. This has affected success
with the method and the drop-out rate is higher than that of traditional
classrooms (Kim, 2004). Although
related studies have pointed
out that on-line learners’ self-regulated learning skills play an important
role in determining the effectiveness of on-line instruction, the most vital element
is the instructors’ involvement in conducting interactions (McMahon & Oliver, 2001; Kim, 2004;
Ellis & Calvo, 2006). Kim
(2004) stated that lack of motivation was the key reason for student drop-out
in on-line courses. He described that
three types of motivation (i.e., motivation to start, motivation to persist,
and motivation to continue) maintain the learners’ self-regulated learning pace
throughout the process. Instructors, therefore,
need to provide an environment rich in various opportunities for human-to-computer
and human-to-human interaction. An
understanding of how learners perceive on-line courses and how different
instructor-related factors influence their motivations and perceptions would
provide valuable input to instructors. This paper, in particular, reports the
findings of students’ perceptions toward on-line instructors’ tea
Technology expenditure and teacher training
According to a statistical analysis conducted by Market Data
There are plenty of new technologies and software developed for educational use. How to choose the right one, on the other hand, is a concern for teachers. No matter what technology the instructors areusing, the content and instructional pedagogy should be the major concern. Westin and Barker (2001) stated that “all instructional materials contain philosophical assumptions about how students learn, and these assumptions are implemented in an instructional design” (p. 15). This statement also applies to on-line instruction.
Interaction in on-line instruction
Interaction is the essence of effective learning. Wagner (1994) wrote that “Interaction is an
interplay and exchange in which individuals and groups influence each other”
(p. 20). In the traditional classroom
setting, the two major forms of human interaction are student-to-student and
student-to-instructor. On-line distance
education also has the capability of supporting these two types of interaction,
especially courses designed with course management software (CMS). In fact, the structure of CMS tends to mimic
“a traditional face-to-face course structure that is familiar to faculty”
(Harvey & Lee, 2001, p. 38). Berge
(1995) described that the on-line instructor’s primary role is to model
Creating a friendly, social environment in which learning is promoted is essential for successful [on-line] modeling. This suggests promoting human relationships, developing group cohesiveness, maintaining the group as a unit, and in other ways helping members to work together in a mutual cause… (p.23).
Means of interaction can be classified as verbal and non-verbal communication. Related studies showed that students’ learning satisfaction highly correlated to instructor immediacy in both verbal and non-verbal interactions (Lai, 2004; Lee & Busch, 2005; Rovai & Barnum, 2003) The major drawback of on-line learning is the non-verbal communication found in the traditional classroom (Lee & Busch, 2005; Rovai & Barnum, 2003). However, instructors can still compensate for this by employing various instructional strategies such as encouraging small group discussions, debates, polling activities, learning partnership exchanges, and sharing some of the messages from students that are particularly relevant (Berge, 1995).
The benefits of on-line learning not only remove the physical and time constraints for instructors as well as learners, they also create a perfect opportunity for us to rethink the core principles of teaching and learning in order to build a new pedagogical model for wider teaching experiences (Boettcher & Conrad, 1999). Lockyer, Patterson, and Happer (1999) also noted that, “The increasing utilization of the World Wide Web (WWW) within higher education allows lecturers to re-examine traditional pedagogical strategies and explore ways of taking advantage of the Web potential to provide enhanced learning experiences” (p. 233). The primary concern, when designing on-line instruction courses, is to keep in mind the learners’ potential experience. Effectively identifying how to meet the learners’ needs is the key element of successful on-line instruction.
This study was conducted with 15 graduate students enrolled
in 5 on-line graduate courses using CMS in a Northwest university in the
Follow-ups were conducted after the first interviews to clarify some of the unclear responses. In order to increase the credibility of the qualitative data, interview transcriptions were also reviewed by interviewees to ensure that the collected information was accurate. Finally, data was organized by grouping respondents’ answers together to address the research questions.
In order to discover more about the students’ perceptions of on-line learning and to test the assumptions about the instructor’s role, the present study focused on the issues of instructors’ understanding of technology and their participation in the on-line courses. The main goal of this study was to characterize the issues that learners faced while dealing with the instructor-related issue. To accomplish this, the following specific research questions were formulated:
1. How do students communicate with the on-line instructor?
2. What is on-line instructors’ capability of using on-line teaching tools?
3. What factors in the on-line courses inhibit students’ learning because of on-line instructors?
Results and Findings
The first research question concerned the channel of communication between students and instructors. Fourteen interviewees pointed out that e-mail was the primary tool for them to get in touch with their instructors followed by a private discussion board in on-line courses. 10 students described that their teachers responded to their question in a timely manner, but 9 participants complained about inadequate feedback on the discussion board. For instance, a student indicated her concern:
I would like the professor to respond more. In both classes I take on-line they rarely do anything, but list assignments. We don't get any feed-back on our discussions with each other. They are interesting and educational, but I could learn as much being on a chat-line. I assume the instructor has more knowledge than the students and that part of their job is to guide us with that knowledge… (ED 2)
Another student suggested that responses from the instructor were very important for him to follow the learning schedule. “Instructors need to make sure they are making contact with their students frequently as I have found that many weeks can go by without a response and sometimes waiting for that response affects the next week’s assignment” (IT 3).
In response to the second research questions, 8 out of 15 participants stated that the instructors’ unfamiliarity with the course website obstructing their learning. Comments are listed as followings. “It is difficult when the instructors are just learning how to use the site. It would be most useful if they could have some training on implementation of this product. At the beginning of the course, my instructor was very confused and had multiple outlines and assignments posted in different places that didn't match with each other. We didn't know what was going on…and really still don't!” (IT 1). “…the fact that the teachers do not know how to properly use the system makes it very difficult for everyone involved. I have had to spend typically an hour to two hours simply combing through the course sites to make sure that I have not overlooked information that has been posted or changed or added or taken away.” (IT 7). Another participant commented that an instructor workshop should be arranged before each semester. “A professor workshop on how to use the system would be great for the teachers that will be instructing via [on-line] format” (SE 1).
The third research question pertained to unsatisfactory factors that were caused by on-line instructors. Poor organization of course materials was mentioned by 6 interviewees. One student said, “I am appalled at the organization of the class I took. Assignments are posted in random areas on the site, the syllabus changed a number of times. I can go on, but basically there is no organization at all” (IT 2). Another student also had the same experience, “It would be nice if professors would organize their sites the same. They put their information under different links. It was a little confusing at first trying to find their outlines, etc” (IT 3).
The results of this study showed that most learners’
experience with the role and convenience of on-line courses was mostly positive. However, comments regarding the instructors’ unfamiliarity
with on-line courseware were mentioned by several respondents. This indicated that many instructors did not sufficiently
understand how to develop and use on-line courses which caused trouble for
students. A quote from a participant illustrates
the problem, “I found out how much each instructor really knew about creating a
Web pages. How familiar with computers
is the instructor? I think some of them
are very unsure of themselves and are lacking in knowledge of using a website. That makes it more difficult for the student,
too.” Thus, equipping instructors with
adequate computer skills and on-line tea
Another major issue was the problem of inconsistency among instructors who created courses. This finding is supported by Tozman’s (2005) study in which he pointed out that inconsistency in on-line course design from instructor to instructor was one of the major symptoms of poor e-learning among students. These results reinforce the need of appropriate training for instructors before they begin creating their own on-line courses with on-line course management software. Also, additional training should be offered in a timely manner after new updates have been introduced in order to help on-line instructors upgrade technical skills and know the latest about new technology.
To ensure the effectiveness of Web-based instruction,
on-line instructors must understand the needs and concerns of their students. This approach would help instructors to
consider the instructional design, pedagogy, and technology when using the
Internet as a teaching tool. Related research
(Volery & Lord, 2000) described that the instructor’s
role in on-line learning is not only a knowledge provider but also a learning
catalyst and knowledge navigator. Therefore,
training instructors in ways to interact with students through using computers
is as important as training them on the
use of course management software. A new
skill set of effective on-line tea
This study investigated the on-line learning experiences of
fifteen graduate students especially regarding the input of their instructors. The benefit of this study is that it clarifies
the particular aspects of instructor-related issues that closely affect the
quality of on-line instruction. Furthermore, the results shown here have
practical significance for helping to train coordinators at institutions of HE
to develop suitable training programs for instructors involved in on-line tea
The developing importance of on-line learning has gained attention from both the public and private sectors. Numerous courses are being offered using this format and more are to be expected n the future. It is fundamentally important for instructors to gain more understanding about the various issues of on-line learning. With appropriate knowledge and training, instructors will improve their ability to provide positive and productive online learning experiences for their students.
Berge, Z. L. (1995). Facilitating computer conferencing: recommendations from the field. Educational Technology, 35(1), 22-30.
Boettcher, J. V., & Conrad, R. M.
(1999). Faculty guide for moving tea
Ellis, R. A., & Calvo, R.A. (2006). Discontinuities in university student experiences of learning through discussions. British Journal of Education Technology, 37(1), 55-68.
Fly, J. B. (1998). Learning with Technology: Integrating Technologies into Classroom Instruction. Retrieved July 17, 2006 from North Central Regional Educational Laboratory Web site: http://www.ncrtec.org/pd /lwt/lwt.htm
Galusha, J. M. (1998). Barriers to learning in distance education. Retrieved January 11, 2006, from http://www.infrastruction.com/barriers.htm.
Kim, K. (2004). Motivational influences in self-directed online learning environments: A qualitative case study. ED485041.
Kerr, S. T. (2005). Why we all want it to work: Toward a culturally-based model for technology and educational change. British Journal of Education Technology, 36(6), 1005-1016.
Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2005). What happens when teachers design educational technology? The development of technological pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 32(2), 131-152.
Lai, H. (2004). Evaluation of WWW on-line
courseware usability and tools. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
Lee, J., & Busch, P. E. (2005). Factors related to instructors’ willingness to participate in distance education. Journal of Educational Research, 99(2), 109-115.
Lockyer, L., Patterson, J., & Happer. B. (1999). Measuring effectiveness of health education in a Web-based learning environment: A preliminary report. Higher Education Research & Development, 18(2), 233-246.
Miller, J. (2001). Technology and Educational Reform in Computer Science
McMahon, M., & Oliver, R. (2001). Promoting self-regulated learning in an on-line learning environment. ED 466194.
MDR. (2006). The college technology review. Retrieved April 13, 2006, from http://www.schooldata.com /pdfs/collegetech06_intro.pdf
Rovai, A. P., & Barnum, K. T. (2003). On-line courses effectiveness: an analysis of student interactions and perception of learning. Journal of Distance education, 18(1), 57-73.
Tozman, R. (2005). The myth about tools. Learning Circuits. Retrieved April 13, 2006, from http://www. learningcircuits.org/2005/jun2005/tozman.htm
Volery, T., & Lord, D. (2000). Critical success factors in online education. International Journal of Educational Management, 14(5), 216-223.
Wagner, E. D. (1994). In support of a functional definition of interaction. The American Journal of Distance Education, 8(2), 6-26.
Weston, T. J., & Barker, L. (2001). Designing, implementing, and evaluating Web-Based learning modules for university students. Educational Technology, 41(4), 15-22.