New report on the effectiveness of online learning
The US Department of Education released a new report on 6/26/09 concerning the effectiveness of online learning. This report is a meta-analysis which analyzes the results of prior studies.
The attention-grabbing headline of this report states, “The meta-analysis found that, on average, students in online learning conditions performed better than those receiving face-to-face instruction. The difference between student outcomes for online and face-to-face classes…was larger in those studies contrasting conditions that blended elements of online and face-to-face instruction with conditions taught entirely face-to-face.”
However, the authors provide this important caveat:
“Despite what appears to be strong support for online learning applications, the studies in this meta-analysis do not demonstrate that online learning is superior as a medium. In many of the studies showing an advantage for online learning, the online and classroom conditions differed in terms of time spent, curriculum and pedagogy. It was the combination of elements in the treatment conditions (which was likely to have included additional learning time and materials as well as additional opportunities for collaboration) that produced the observed learning advantages. At the same time, one should note that online learning is much more conducive to the expansion of learning time than is face-to-face instruction”
Later in the report the authors mention,
“Studies in which analysts judged the curriculum and instruction to be identical or almost identical in online and face-to-face conditions had smaller effects than those studies where the two conditions varied in terms of multiple aspects of instruction” (page xvi)
and
“In terms of instructional features, the online learning conditions in these studies were less likely to be instructor-directed (8 contrasts) than they were to be student-directed, independent learning (17 contrasts) or interactive and collaborative in nature (23 contrasts). Online learners typically had opportunities to practice skills or test their knowledge (42 effects were from studies reporting such opportunities).” (page 17)
In my humble opinion, this study validates the effectiveness of a variety of pedagogical techniques and thoughtful course design. These techniques can be applied to both online and traditional courses; the pedagogy matters more than the medium.
An article which summarizes the findings of the report is available at
http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2009/06/29/online
and the full report is available at
http://www.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/tech/evidence-based-practices/finalreport.pdf
If you enjoyed this post, please consider to leave a comment or subscribe to the feed and get future articles delivered to your feed reader.
Comments
I agree completely with Marni’s comment. When faculty (and those who support them) enter into the new endeavor of teaching online, they are more receptive to trying new technologies and pedagogies. People start thinking “out of the box” because they are no longer teaching in a box (that is, a traditional classroom). Most of the tools that people use for teaching online are also available to those teaching traditional courses. The big difference is that online teachers are more likely to use the tools.
-John
What a wonderful post John – thanks for sharing! I agree with your conclusion above…that is, that sound instructional design and innovative, responsive pedagogy are the root cause of any positive impact of the effectiveness of instruction regardless of the context. However, there might just be something about teaching online, especially with the new and expanding set of tools to promote interactivity and social learning, that is inspiring instructors to reexamine their every day conception of being and doing in the classroom. I believe that, for many educators, the new environment is actually encouraging a shift (or shifts) in pedagogical philosophy and in our understanding of teaching and learning in the higher ed domain.