Student perceptions and opinions toward e-learning in the college environment.

Borstorff, Patricia C. ; Lowe, S. Keith

ABSTRACT

Distance or electronic learning (E-learning) has become very popular on university and other academic campuses. Various distance learning technologies are being utilized for the delivery of courses and entire degree programs. With the advancement of instructional technology in education, both the courses and the duties of instructors are changing. Researchers have called for more attention to end-users' perceptions and satisfaction with online courses and the effectiveness of such offerings. This research surveys 113 business students in regards to perceptions concerning and satisfaction with distance education. The survey showed 88% reporting a positive E-learning experience and 79% would recommend E-learning courses to others. Eighty-eight percent would participate in E-learning courses in the future. Concerns were expressed over lack of communication with the instructor and other students. Younger students desired more contact with other students. Females desired better communication with instructors and clearer instructions.

INTRODUCTION

During the last few decades, the world has undergone significant changes in terms of technological advancements and the exchange of information. Advancements in information and communication technology led to distance learning becoming a focus of global attention (Pye, 1999). As a result of an increasingly competitive environment due to tightening budgets and lower enrollments, universities must continually review their curriculum and the methods by which instruction is delivered to students. Universities have tried to increase enrollment numbers, decrease the number of extra-hire teachers and offer a more flexible schedule to people seeking education and training (Zapalska, Shao, & Shao, 2003). This trend has resulted in educational institutions reaching students in remote locations and allocating the costs and expertise across multiple locations. The growth of part-time, non-residential, non-traditional students has fueled the demand for distance options. Due to these developments being fairly recent phenomena, little research exists investigating the effectiveness of, and student reaction to, distance education.

With changes in the economy, many college students have been forced to complete their degrees by non-traditional methods. One method of obtaining the required courses for a college degree is by participating in a distance learning environment. Many non-traditional students work full-time in addition to having to juggle the demands of family, find time to attend class, and prepare assignments. Distance learning is education that is accessible at a time, place, location, and pace that is convenient to the user. The most commonly used distance education tool would be e-learning (online) courses. "E-learning", in simple terms, is Electronic Learning or any learning facilitated by electronic means which would include computer-based training (CBT) with modules, CD-ROM training, web-enabled, and Internet learning (Thomas & Cunningham, 2002). E-learning courses provide the student with an opportunity to continue their education or pursue personal and career development without a rigid schedule of assignments and class meetings. The online format offers the student a great deal of flexibility in terms of when they study, how they study, and how quickly they cover and master the material.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Because e-learning can be cost effective when compared to the traditional learning methods, more businesses and universities are using e-learning courses to teach their employees and students anything from company policies to new skills necessary for professional development. They are reducing expenditures by not having to distribute the course by paper or CD-ROM to all of the employees and by not having to send their employees to training centers, which automatically reduces or eliminates food, lodging, and travel expenses (Pallatto, 2002).

ADVANTAGES TO E-LEARNING

Web-based training can be applied in university settings in order to deliver instruction to students who are physically unable to attend class, or live in remote locations, or are located internationally (Boose, 2001). When compared to traditional instructor-led training, e-learning offers several advantages to students interested in pursuing personal development. Some of those advantages include: consistency, accessibility, adaptability, affordability, flexibility, and controllability over their learning experience.

An advantage to e-learning is the ability to achieve a higher level of consistency in training. With traditional training, it is likely that different individuals provide the training for one workforce. Having several trainers for a particular training topic could lead to different interpretations of the training material from one instructor to another which may or may not be the intended interpretation (McShulskis, 1997). Because the same training is given to all employees, the company can be assured that the quality and content of the training is consistent at all locations (Garvey, 2002). Consistency in training is a substantial benefit not only for the company but also for the student.

The common barriers to training have always been time and distance (Gunasekaran, McNeil, and Shaul, 2002). However, e-learning virtually eliminates these two barriers. With training materials accessible by personal computers, training is rendered when and where it is acceptable to the user. The great accessibility of e-learning can be a substantial cost savings to a company (Nucleus Research, Inc., 2001). By enabling remote users access to e-learning systems, the organization does not have the expense of arranging training at a remote site or the expense involved with employees traveling to training sites (Kruse, 2006c). Eliminating travel time to a remote training site also allows employees to spend their time more productively. Students derive cost savings by using the technology in their own homes, eliminating travel expenses to the university. For the university, cost savings result when they can attract students from anywhere in the world.

In terms of accessibility, the student has access to the online course at any time whether they are at work, home, or on the road. With today's technology, a student who owns a laptop or any type of Internet capable device, can access a web-based online course at any time. Some fortunate people can even access the internet from their cellular phone without the need for a land-based phone line or network connection (Kruse, 2006b).

Utilizing an E-learning course format is advantageous to not only the student but also the instructor or company providing the course in terms of its adaptability. The content and format of an online course is easily updated to keep up with the ever changing times. In the event that changes need to be made, the information can easily be uploaded from the instructor's computer to the server-computer which allows the student access to the most recent information available when they log onto the course site (Kruse, 2006b). The benefit to that is two fold. One, time and money will be saved since the information doesn't have to be duplicated and redistributed to the students unlike with CD-ROM or other distance learning applications. Two, the student always has access to the most recent information available.

E-learning is also adaptable in its content and delivery such that it can be customized for any given situation. After analyzing an employee's training needs, the e-learning system can determine what level of training that employee may require. Training does not have to be cut short or rushed because the instructor ran out of time. Employees requiring more basic training can be identified. The content and format of an online course is easily updated to reflect changing times (Kruse, 2006c).

Accessibility allows a user the luxury of training where they want, but e-learning's benefit of flexibility allows a user the luxury to train when they want. With e-learning, a highly mobile workforce is able to complete training assignments whenever and from wherever they choose. The ability to access training anytime or anywhere is perceived as a key advantage to e-learning (Nucleus Research, Inc. 2001). Increased flexibility also allows learners to work at his/her own pace. Rather than force all employees to adhere to the same schedule, employees who can work faster are permitted. A study involving a 20-group sampling split between e-learning and traditional classroom training showed that the e-learning group finished 34 percent faster on average than the traditional group (Lawson, 1999).

Affordability is also an advantage to E-learning. This would be a benefit to both the student and instructor or organization providing the course. An online course is inexpensive in that the distribution and delivery costs are minimal. From a business perspective, an online course would usually be cheaper than a traditional conference or seminar for their employees (James, 2002). For the student, the cost of an e-learning course is generally the same amount or less than a regular course taught in the traditional manner.

One of the greatest advantages is also a major area of concern. The student also has control over every aspect of the learning situation from the time spent on task, practice time, and study time (Brown, 2001). Featherstone (2006) named the student's control over their learning environment as the primary advantage to taking an E-learning course. Because students control so much of the activity that transpires in web-based learning, such as the amount of time spent learning and practicing, instructors should be aware that much of their responsibility has shifted to students. Research (Brown, 2001) indicates that many learners may not wisely utilize their instruction time. Depending upon a person's goal orientation and learning self-efficacy (how they approach the learning process), they may rush through instruction and skip practice sessions.

According to Brown (2001), even though E-learning would be an ideal learning situation for some students, the choices made regarding study time and the effort expended toward learning the material ultimately predicts the performance of the student. A benefit of the student having so much control over their learning experience is that advanced students can proceed without becoming bored with repetitive instruction and can progress through the material without having to wait on other students who may not be grasping the material as well. By the same token, students who are having difficulty with the material can slow down to a pace suitable to them which allows them opportunity to fully understand the content and not get frustrated with themselves (Kruse, 2006a).

Web-based learning, unlike traditional face-to-face instruction, is nonlinear. Its multidimensional aspects allow student to apply their existing knowledge, as well as a wealth of additional resources, in an almost instantaneous manner. Links to associated websites, a diversity of multimedia inputs such as video, audio, and still photos, and online chat rooms allow the learner to seek knowledge that will relate to their prior, personal experiences and engage them in interdisciplinary training (Liam and Huang, 2002).

Students in one research study indicated their satisfaction in the ability for web-based instruction to archive their progress throughout a course (Helmi, Haynes, and Maun, 2000). Dedicated students are also able to extend their learning beyond the requirements of a course when they tap into the wealth of online resources (Berger and Topol, 2001).

Adult learning theory states that adult learners prefer having a high degree of control in learning situations. Computer-based training gives them that control by allowing them to choose time spent on task, practice time, and study time (Harp, Taylor, and Satzinger, 1998). According to Brown (2001), even though e-learning would be an ideal learning situation for many, the choices made regarding study time and the effort expended towards learning the material ultimately predicts the performance of the student.

This controllable structure also allows the training to be geared toward the differences in individual learning rates (Blankehorn, 1999). Since the workforce is increasingly more diverse, onesize-fits-all training is no longer an option (Rand, 1996). Unlike traditional classroom training where the training is paced to accommodate the slowest person in the class, computerized training allows trainees to cover only the topics that they need to cover, not wasting time on subjects or concepts they already understand (Hein, 1999).

DISADVANTAGES TO E-LEARNING

While e-learning appears to have many benefits, it does have some drawbacks. These include bandwidth issues, culture, cost, acceptance, socialization and lack of human contact, and effectiveness, and technical difficulties. Bandwidth, by definition, is the speed of the server's and student's connections to the Internet/Intranet. The higher the bandwidth, the faster the connection is to download the information and streaming audio/video files needed for the course. Low bandwidth is generally only capable of handling text and some graphics. It is not always feasible for E-learning sites to utilize a lot of audio/video files because not everyone has the luxury of a high bandwidth as with cable and satellite company internet providers (Kruse, 2006c).

People resist change for many reasons. Even potentially positive change can sometimes be viewed as inconvenient or threatening. Because traditional classes take place in a class room with instructors present, it is perceived as a passive teaching method. However, because e-learning takes place through a ready-made computer program, it can seem cold and impersonal.

E-learning requires an individual to change their habits, behaviors, attitudes and perspectives. By taking away an individual's ability to interact with other human beings during the learning process, the synergistic group learning dynamic is interrupted (Campbell & Swift, 2005). People learn a lot from their classmates through differences of opinions and questions. E-learning misses these interactions, resulting in little or no 'in-person' contact and learning on their own.

Even though E-learning offers the student more control over their learning experience, Brown (2001) found that students many times do not exercise their control wisely. Combine this with the lack of human contact and personal instruction; the student may have serious difficulties grasping the material necessary in order to be successful in the E-learning course. According to Weaver (2002), students by nature are "social learners" who usually prefer to learn in groups and interact with their peers. Some methods used to combat this disadvantage are the virtual classrooms or chat rooms designated for that course, discussion boards, threaded bulletin boards, and e-mails to the instructor and/or fellow students. Weaver (2006) also noted that although the freedom and accessibility aspect of an e-learning course is attractive, students may not be motivated or disciplined enough to complete the course if they are not held accountable for the material to an instructor as they would be in a traditional classroom setting.

Perhaps the most difficult barrier to overcome regarding e-learning is end-user acceptance of it as a training medium. The lack of face-to-face interaction that causes students to feel isolated is the most commonly cited objection to e-learning. Many students and trainers feel that e-learning is cold and impersonal and that the valuable aspect of students and instructors having open discussion of class content is lost (Brower, 2002; Murgolo-Poore, 2001). Students involved in traditional training are able to engage in discussion and debate of class content in after-hours, nonscheduled social settings (Nisar, 2002). According to Weaver (2002), students by nature are "social learners" who usually prefer to learn in groups and interact with their peers.

Both the instructors and the students' roles change in this new format, and many students feel that they lose the valuable interaction common in a face-to-face setting. Many instructors feel that "to teach is to touch students," and they fear that e-learning will drastically change the way they are able to come into contact with learners (Brower, 2002).

Possibly the most important disadvantage of e-learning is the loss of social interaction and lack of human support (Anstine & Skidmore, 2005). According to Rubenstein (2003), the electronic learning opportunity ignores the soft side of interaction of the librarian and instructor with the students. Students do not always know what to ask or what is not known. This is the role of the instructor and librarian in the learning process. Without these elements present, e-learning does not furnish the full educational experience, leaving students to feel a certain element of isolation (Conaway, Easton, & Schmidt, 2005).

Some concerns of e-learning center on the lack of socialization and dialogue with other classmates and the instructor. Proponents of e-learning point to the use of online chat, listservs, and newsgroups as methods that allow students to interact and learn from others. Research indicates that students who experience face-to-face learning are more satisfied, but will accept a distance learning experience for the sake of convenience (Berger and Topol, 2001).

Even with all of the freedom of e-learning, there still needs to be interaction for the student to fully 'train' himself or herself with the information provided. Interaction should include complex activities for students, such as engaging and reflecting, annotating, questioning, answering, pacing, elaborating discussing inquiring, problem solving, linking, constructing, analyzing, evaluating, and synthesizing (Liaw and Huang, 2002). E-learning should ultimately empower the end users' professional skills.

While e-learning increases the flexibility and accessibility of training, some individuals do not possess the discipline required to manage it (Garvey, 1999). Even though E-learning offers the student more control over their learning experience, Brown (2001) found that students many times do not exercise their control "wisely". Combine this with the lack of human contact and personal instruction; the student may have serious difficulties grasping the material necessary in order to be successful in the E-learning course. Also, students may not be motivated or disciplined enough to complete the course if they are not held accountable for the material to an instructor as they would be in a traditional classroom setting.

Despite the advancements in modern technology, a computer server is bound to experience technical difficulties at some point in time. During this "down time", students are unable to neither connect to the E-learning course nor collaborate with their peers or instructor which can slow down the student's progress. Even though there are usually backups of the e-learning courses available in cases of an unexpected "technical difficulty", there will ultimately be some down time while the backup live and online (Gibson, 2006). Gibson (2006) noted that it is crucial to consider the technology requirements and issues upfront before even implementing an e-learning system such as the "operating system, Web browser, tracking system, learning management system, database, and server(s).

A negative implication of e-learning is information overload. The task is to sort through and manage the large amount of material available in the learning process. Staying on topic and focusing on the exercises at hand becomes a challenge when so many other avenues of learning beckon. Liaw and Huang (2002) indicate that when information overload occurs, learning time increase and learning motivation decreases. Students faced with numerous points of information to consider may be inclined to choose the easiest route instead of carefully evaluating the validity of the information. In order for e-learning to be effective, the instructor must establish perimeters for learning and carefully guide students from one activity to the next in order to avoid mental fatigue (Helmi, Haynes, & Maun, 2000). Whether or not e-learning affects student performance is debatable, as results of studies have been mixed (Berger & Topol, 2001). Employee communication is a critical factor in "overall employee satisfaction, productivity, and organizational success". Obstacles to successful communication are time, distance, costs, quality, flow and responsiveness (Murgolo-Poore & Pitt, 2001). Communication in an e-learning environment is more difficult because much of the context and nonverbal cues are eliminated. The communication methods predominantly used in virtual teams are telephone (included in this category are the audio conferences, voicemail, and regular telephone conversations), and other communication technologies like e-mail, chat, electronic discussions, and white boards (Watson-Manheim & Belanger, 2002).

The general consensus is that face-to-face encounters provide the richest form of human interaction. In terms of technology, media richness refers to how the multimedia technology conveys vocal inflections, tone, body language, and facial gestures. A "rich" medium is when none or hardly any verbal/nonverbal cues are filtered out of the media (Van der Smagt, 2000). Media "rich" forms of communication are generally necessary and preferred for an important task or in the event of a complex message. Less important tasks or messages should be sent via e-mail or posted on the bulletin board or desktop workspace (Kelley, 2001).

In distance learning, courses are only as effective as its platforms for the distribution of information. The platforms, i.e., whiteboards, virtual classrooms, blackboards, and discussion boards, used should be easily accessible and utilized in order to meet the needs of both the instructor and student (Colace & De Santo, 2006). The primary communication tool in a distance learning environment is e-mail. Students use e-mail to communicate with the instructor and their peers when necessary.

There is much debate among researchers as to the long-term effectiveness of e-learning, and more research will need to be done to accurately calculate that effectiveness. Some research points to the successes of e-learning such as its cost effectiveness and resourceful use of time, while opponents of e-learning claim that it creates a passive learning environment and lowers the quality of education when compared to traditional classroom settings (Brower, 2003). A study by Ford (1999) at a southeastern university showed that classes taught using the Internet have approximately the same grade distribution as equivalent classes taught on campus, but with a lower percentage of students achieving a passing grade. However, Ford opined that these failures were linked more to a lack of self-discipline, than to the training itself.

There is still a divide over the effectiveness of e-learning in many corporations and a more stringent means of monitoring the effectiveness of e-learning should be done. According to a survey of 138 business professors, e-learning generally ranked in the lowest half of 20 training methods selected (Kaupins, 2002). With the change in training philosophy from traditional class room training to more learner-controlled training, there must be a refocusing of research attention toward the responsibility of the learner in determining performance (Brown, 2001).

METHOD

A survey was administered to 113 business students at a southeastern university with the purpose of obtaining information of these students' opinions toward distance education courses. The survey instrument used in the research was developed by the authors and included three parts. Part I contained items to identify demographic information for the participants which included degree program, gender, age, employment status, and experience with distance education. Part II contained items to measure communication methods between students and instructor and other similar items. Part III contained twelve Likert scale questions pertaining to participants' attitudes toward various aspects of distance learning. A five-point Likert scale with rankings from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) was used to measure these attitudes.

Research participants

Using a stratified sampling method, several classes were identified and registered students in the course were administered the survey instrument. Participation was voluntary and participants were presumed to possess a working knowledge of distance education courses in higher education, specifically in the manner by which these courses are administered. The survey was conducted anonymously; no personal information was collected that could be used to identify any individual participants.

Demographics

Participants in the survey are described by the following demographic information. The gender of participants was 58% female and 42% male. The age groups were 5% under 21 years of age; 47% aged 21 to 30; 25% aged 31 to 40; 16% aged 41 to 50; and 7% over 50. Type of degree sought by participants was 42% for undergraduate, 43% for a master's degree, and 15% for other degrees or certification programs. Eighty-eight percent reported being actively employed while 12% did not work. Of the respondents who were employed, 80% worked 30 or more hours per week. Forty-eight percent have at least one child while 52% reported having no children. Forty-nine percent have previously obtained a college degree prior to being enrolled in this course while 51% were pursuing an initial college degree or other certification.

RESEARCH FINDINGS AND ANALYSES

Experience in Distance Education

Two questions were used to measure participants' level of expertise and experience toward distance education. First, participants were asked to self-evaluate their level of technological expertise. The results were as follows: beginner (6%); medium (26%); intermediate (58%); and advanced (10%). Various delivery methods of distance learning technologies were reported by respondents as follows: 89% reported experience with an internet based course; 26% with interactive video or teleconferencing; and 18% with computer-based software training modules.

Reasons for Enrolling in a Distance Education Course

Respondents reported various reasons they decided to enroll in a distance education course. Ninety-two percent reported that convenience was a factor for enrolling in a distance education course; 49% cited accessibility; 22% responded adaptability; 76% flexibility; and 18% reported that their reason for enrollment was simply because the course is offered solely by the university in a distance education format. These responses sum to more than 100% because participants were allowed to select multiple reasons for enrolling in a distance education course.

Student to Instructor Interaction

Two questions were used to solicit participants' perceptions of student to instructor interaction in a distance education course. The first question asked participants to describe the quantity of the student to instructor interaction. Forty-three percent stated the quantity of interaction was less than a traditional class format, 35% stated the quantity was about the same, and 22% felt the interaction was greater than a traditional course format. The second question asked participants to describe the quality of the student to instructor interaction. Seventeen percent responded that the quality of student to instructor interaction is less than experienced in a traditional class, 44% stated the quality was about the same, and 39% responded the quality of interaction was better than a traditional course. Interestingly, we found more students rating the quality of student to instructor interaction positively in distance education classes, while, as expected, students rated the quantity of interaction as less in distance education classes.

Effort Applied Toward Coursework

Respondents were asked to quantify the amount of effort applied in a distance education course toward learning new lecture material. Eleven percent reported expending less effort toward learning new material than in past traditionally-formatted courses, 35% reported the effort was the same, and 54% responded that they spent more effort learning new material than in a traditional course.

Communication with Instructor

Students were asked to identify the types of communication used when corresponding with the instructor for the course. The following types of communication (followed by the percentages of participants using that specific type) were reported: telephone (50%); email (98%); discussion board (76%); virtual chat (56%); group pages (23%); on-campus meeting (35%); fax (12%); and U.S. mail (19%). These responses sum to more than 100% because participants were allowed to select multiple types of communication.

Communication with Classmates

Eighty percent of participants reported communication with other students enrolled in the same course while 20% answered no communication. Of those reporting communication with classmates, the following types of communication were used: telephone (27%); email (61%); discussion board (64%); virtual chat (43%); group pages (22%); on-campus meeting (16%); fax (4%); and U.S. mail (6%). Again, these responses sum to more than 100% because participants were allowed to choose multiple types of communication.

Item Analyses

Item analyses were conducted on the 12 Likert scale items hypothesized to assess student perceptions on distance education. Initially, each of the twelve items was correlated with the total score for distance education (with the item removed). All the correlations were greater than .30 except for two items: "It is important to have interaction with my professor" (r = .18) and "It is important to me to have interaction with my distance education classmates" (r = .29). These two survey items differed in content from the other ten items in that it measured importance of direct interaction. Based on these results, the two items assessing the importance on interaction were eliminated from the scale. The revised ten item scale revealed that all correlations exceeded .30.

The reliability of the measurement scale was analyzed by computing Cronbach's alpha. According to Dewberry (2004), an alpha coefficient of .70 is usually the minimum acceptable level. Any alpha less than .70 indicates that Likert scale items in a survey are unlikely to be measuring the same constructs. Cronbach's alpha for this survey was found to be .85, which indicates all items are highly correlated.

Likert Scale Questions

Two questions addressed perceptions toward interaction between students, classmates and their instructors. Ninety percent of participants agreed that student interaction with the instructor in a distance education course is of vital importance, while 8% had no opinion and only 2% disagreed on the importance of this interaction. Fifty-one percent agreed that interaction with classmates was important, while 17 % disagreed and 32% had no opinion.

Two questions dealt with communication problems with classmates and the instructor during a distance education course. Sixty-six percent of participants reported no communication problems between themselves and their instructor, while 23% reported communication problems and 11% reported no opinion. Fifty-seven percent of participants reported no communication problems with their classmates while 21% reported problems. The number one recommended change for distance learning was to have more interaction with the instructor followed by improved technology to overcome communication challenges (i.e., update servers, increase accessibility of sites, make site simpler, etc).

Three questions measured participants' attitudes toward the difficulty of course material and expectations of learning. Fifty-nine percent agreed that they learned as much as they would in a traditional class format while 21% felt they learned less. Sixty-eight percent preferred class projects and assignments that forced them to learn new things while 15% did not. This indicated to us that students were accepting a higher level of responsibility for their success in distance classes. Eighty-one percent felt they were challenged as much in a distance education course as they would be in a traditional format; 12% reported they were less challenged.

One question addressed the clarity of instructions in a distance learning environment. Seventy-two percent agreed the instructions toward learning were clear in distance environment while 13% felt instructions were unclear.

Two questions measured participants' perceptions toward future courses in distance learning. Seventy-nine percent would recommend a distance education course to their peers; only 9% would not recommend this course format. An overwhelming majority of participants expressed satisfaction with distance learning in that they would participate in a similar format in the future. Eighty-eight percent would participate in another distance education course while 7% would not.

Statistics for the mean responses of the revised ten item Likert scale survey are listed in Table 1. Included are mean responses and relevant descriptors to illustrate perceptions for each of these ten survey items.

DIFFERENCES BY GROUPS

Chi-square analysis was conducted to examine any differences in responses to the twelve Likert-scale questions used to analyze respondents' perceptions toward distance learning. These analyses were conducted within three demographic items: gender, age, and student classification (undergraduate or graduate).

Significant differences were found within gender for survey items one (When taking a distance education course, I had no problems communicating with my instructor when I have questions or concerns) and ten (The instructions are clear with the distance learning environment). The significant difference in item one [Chi-square = 15.60, df = 2, p < .01] indicated that females experienced more problems in communicating with the course instructor to address questions or concerns. The significant difference in item ten [Chi-square = 11.59, df = 2, p < .01] indicated that males perceived the instructions within distance learning to be more clear than females.

Significant differences in perceptions were found within age for survey items one (When taking a distance education course, I had no problems communicating with my instructor when I have questions or concerns) and nine (It is important to me to have interaction with my distance education classmates). The significant difference in item one [Chi-square = 6.63, df = 2, p = .04] indicated that respondents age 30 and under experienced fewer problems than those 31 and over in communicating with the course instructor to address questions or concerns. The significant difference in item nine [Chi-square = 10.46, df = 2, p < .01] indicated that respondents age 30 and under felt that interaction with distance education classmates was more important than those respondents 31 and over.

Significant differences were located by student classification for survey item one and eleven (I have more flexibility with distance learning than the traditional classroom setting). The significant difference in item one [Chi-square = 10.19, df = 2, p <.01] indicated that respondents classified as graduate students experienced fewer problems than undergraduate students in communicating with the course instructor to address questions or concerns. The significant difference in item eleven [Chi-square = 7.17, df = 2, p = .03] indicated that graduate students reported more flexibility with a distance education than a traditional classroom lecture format than undergraduate students, who reported less flexibility in the distance education format.

A previous study in 2001 in the College of Business at the same university revealed 74% of those surveyed had taken an online course. 75% described their level of technical expertise as intermediate. The number one problem with e-learning was the students felt like they learned better with a professor present. However, 66% would take another online course and 69% would recommend it to others. Communication between the e-learning student and instructor was also an issue. Communicating through an electronic medium can sometimes be difficult because both the verbal and non-verbal cues that are used to convey messages are not available for interpretation.

The students identified flexibility and convenience the primary advantages for e-learning courses when compared to the traditional classroom. The students rated highly e-learning being 'accessible' and controllable with their studying at their own pace. 28 percent of the students agreed that the amount of responsibility and motivation required to be successful was higher in e-learning. Communication concerns between the e-learning student and instructor were an issue with 39 percent. Comments by students included not having verbal and non-verbal cues to convey messages. Students also felt that at times something gets lost in the transmission, and information is not received as intended, which makes establishing trust between student and instructor difficult. Also, students reported that limited broadband access caused problems with slow transmission of materials. An instructor can reduce some problems by utilizing a good plan and consistently trying to add communication opportunities with students to the course.

FUTURE RESEARCH

Investigating the unique differences between students of traditional teaching versus distance learning methods is an area of interest. Determining the antecedents for success in each discipline would be of value to universities and students. This study was limited on the number of differentiating variables investigated. Future studies may want to investigate other variables, such as additional demographics, perceived risk, involvement and knowledge. Additionally, this study did not examine success rates in distance learning situations. Finally, this study was limited to one university. Broader-based samples will need to be the norm in future studies in order to rule out variables attributing to the differences other than those under investigation.

The popularity and importance of distance education has been recognized over the past two decades. While universities are competing for e-learning students with new offerings and advanced technology, there have been few studies of determinants of student success in using the distance education approach. There has been profiles based on intuitive deduction and educated speculation; future studies should add rigor to these assumptions.

There seems to be concerns by students of the nontraditional teaching method of e-learning. Better understanding of the issue of retention of material would be fertile ground for additional studies in e-learning. This study was limited to an investigation of attitudes about e-learning. Future research should focus on what types of learning is best suited to this new technology (Brown, 2001). Also worthy of investigation are attributes of learners such as responsibility, socialization needs, and retention of material. While e-learning has been shown to have financial and availability benefits to a broad base of learners, e-learning is still new and will require long-term research to accurately study the effectiveness of e-learning on the individual.

CONCLUSION

Electronic learning has advanced to the point of being a major component of the curriculum in many institutions of higher education. Cost savings and the opportunities for significant enrollment increases will continue to drive these methods of instructional delivery. The advantages from both the student and institutional perspectives are significant, and many of the disadvantages can be reduced or eliminated as technologies continue to advance, and adequate training and planning is implemented by the institutions. Ultimately, electronic learning training or education will only be effective if the perceptions of the end-users are understood. The technology is only beginning to reveal its potential.

Based on our study, we concluded that most (88%) of our students were satisfied with distance learning. In addition, 88% would take another distance learning course and 77% would recommend it to their colleagues. Evaluation of students' opinion is an area where faculty can frame a course to assist students in becoming more efficient. Using the information from student surveys assist a university in offering what their customers want in a format that satisfies them. With competition being keen for students, the university who listens to the students and adjusts courses to meet their needs will be the one experiencing a viable student body and a healthy bottom line.

REFERENCES

Anstine, Jeff & Skidmore, Mark, (2005). A small sample study of traditional and online courses with sample selection adjustment. Journal of Economic Education, 107-127.

Berger, K.A. & Topol, M.T. (2001). Technology to enhance learning: Use of a web site platform in traditional classes and distance learning. Marketing Education Review, 11(3), 15-26.

Blankenhorn, J. C. (1999). How cost-effective is computer-based training? Wood Technology, 126(3), 29-30.

Boose, M.A. (2001). Web-based instruction: Successful preparation for course transformation. Journal of Applied Business Research, 17(4), 69-80.

Brower, H. (2003). On emulating classroom discussion in a distance-delivered OBHR course: Creating an on-line learning community. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 2(1), 22-36.

Brown, K.G. (2001). Using computers to deliver training: Which employees learn and why? Personnel Psychology, 54(2), 271-296.

Campbell, C.R. & Swift, C.O. (2006). Perceptions of compressed video distance learning (DL) across location and levels of instruction in business courses. Journal of Education for Business, 81(3),170-174.

Colace, F. & De Santo, M. (2006). Models for E-learning environment evaluation: a proposal. Retrieved March 15, 2003, from http://www.ssgrrit/en/ssgrr2002s/papers/330.pdf.

Conaway, R.N., Easton, S.S. & Schmidt, W.V., (2005). Strategies for enhancing student Interaction and Immediacy in Online Courses. Business Communication Quarterly, 68(1), 23-35.

Cronbach, L.J. (1951). Coefficient Alpha and Internal Structure of Tests. Psychometrika, 16, 297-334.

Dewberry, C. (2004). Statistical methods for organizational research: Theory and practice. New York: Routledge.

Featherstone, M. (2006, July). Personal Interview. Professor of E-Commerce, Jacksonville State University.

Ford, D. (2006, May). Personal interview. Professor of Computer Science, Jacksonville State University.

Garvey, C. (1999). Factors affect web training. HR News--Society for Human Resource Management, 1.

Gunasekaran, A., R. McNeil, and D. Shaul, (2002). E-learning: Research and applications. Industrial and Commercial Training, 34(2), 44-53.

Gibson, K. (2006, October). Personal Interview. MCSE, United Defense.

Harp, C.G., Taylor, S.C. & Satzinger, J.W. (1998). Computer training and individual differences: When method matters. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 9(3), 271-283.

Helmi, Dahli G., Haynes, G., & Maun, C. (2000). Internet teaching methods across the disciplines. Journal of Applied Business Research, 16(4), 1-14.

Hein, K. (1999). Face-to-face training: Un-PC? Incentive, 173(4), 22-25.

James, G. (2002). Advantages and disadvantages of online learning. Retrieved July 1, 2006 from www.allencomm.com.

Kaupins, G., (2002). Trainer Opinions of Selected Computer-Based Training Methods. Journal of Education for Business, 319-323.

Kruse, K. (2006a). The Benefits and drawbacks of e-learning. Retrieved February 17, 2006 from http://www.elearningguru. com/articles/art1_3.html.

Kruse, K. (2006b). Measuring E-learning's benefits. Retrieved July 2, 2006, from http://www.elearningguru. com/articles/art5_3.htm.

Kruse, K. (2006c). Using the Web for learning: Advantages and Disadvantages. Retrieved June 5, 2006 from http://www.e-learningguru.com/articles/art1_9.html.

Liaw, S. & Huang, H. (2002). How web technology can facilitate learning. Information Systems Management, 19(1), 56-61.

McLaren, C.H., (2004). A comparison of student persistence and performance in online and classroom business statistics experiences. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 2(1), 1-10.

McShulskis, E. (1997). Computers aid training. HR Magazine, 42(5), 24-26.

Murgolo-Poore, M. & Pitt, L. (2001) "Intranets and employee communication: PR behind the firewall. Journal of Communication Management, 5(3), 231-241.

Nucleus Research, Inc. (2001). ROI profile: IBM mindspan solutions IBM basic blue.

Pallatto, J. (2002, September). E-learning makes the grade. Internet World, 8(9), 30-35.

Phillips, M.R. and M.J. Peters, (1999) Targeting rural students with distance learning courses: A comparative study of determinants. Journal of Education for Business, 74(6), 351-357.

Pye, J. (1999). Perspectives of ICT in professional development and education. Information Services & Use, 19(4), 307-313.

Rand, A. (1996). Technology transforms training. HR Focus, 73(11), 11-13.

Thomas, J.L. & Cunningham, B.J. (2003). Perceived risk and segmentation variables in traditional vs. non-traditional college courses: An exploratory analysis. Marketing Educator Quarterly, 2(1). .

Van der Smagt, T. (2000). Enhancing virtual teams: social relations v. communication technology. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 100(3/4), 148-158.

Weaver, P. (2002, August). Preventing E-learning failure. Training & Development, 56(8), 45-51.

Watson-Manheim, M.B. & Belanger, F. (2002, May). Support for communication-based work processes in virtual work. E-Service Journal, 1(3), 61-83.

Zapalska, A., Shao, L.P., & Shao, D.J. (2003). Evaluating the effectiveness of WEBCT using student feedback. Academy of Educational Leadership Journal, 7(1), 91-102.

Patricia C. Borstorff, Jacksonville State University S. Keith Lowe, Jacksonville State University

Table 1: Statistics for Likert Scale Questions' on Students'
Perceptions of Distance Learning

Question Mean Descriptor

When taking a distance education course, I had 3.67 Undecided
no problems communicating with my instructor
when I have questions or concerns.

It is important to have interaction with 4.46 Agree
my professor.

I never had any difficulties communicating with 3.50 Undecided
my fellow classmates during the course of the
semester.

I think I learn just as much in a distance 3.63 Undecided
learning environment as I would sitting in
class with a hands-on instructor.

I prefer projects/assignments that force me to 3.68 Undecided
learn new things.

I feel that I am challenged as much in a 4.12 Agree
distance learning environment as I would
normally be in a traditional classroom.

I would recommend distance education courses to 4.15 Agree
my peers if asked.

I would participate in another distance educa- 4.29 Agree
tion course if given the opportunity.

It is important to me to have interaction with 3.51 Undecided
my distance education classmates.

The instructions are clear with the distance 3.79 Undecided
learning environment.

I have more flexibility with distance learning 4.38 Agree
than the traditional classroom setting.

I have more autonomy (or independence) with 4.33 Agree
distance learning classes.

(1=strongly agree, 2=agree, 3=undecided, 4=disagree,
5=strongly disagree)