Student perceptions of management courses delivered via distance learning technologies.

Gupta, Sanjay ; Schnake, Mel E.

INTRODUCTION

Schools of business are increasingly adopting distance-learning technologies for the delivery of courses and even complete degree programs (Hildebrand, 1995). This trend has resulted from the rapid developments in information technology, the ability of schools of business to reach students in distant locations, and the sharing of costs and expertise across multiple locations (Webster & Hackley, 1997). A recent survey indicated that more than half of the 2, 215 four-year colleges and universities in the U.S., offer distance learning courses (Gubernich & Ebeling, 1997; Vasarhelyi & Graham, 1997). In addition, the growth of part-time, non-residential, non-traditional students has further increased the demand for distance learning (Hubbard, 1997; Green, 1996). Given it's relatively recent development, little research exists examining the effectiveness of, and student reaction to, these methods of course delivery.

While there are differences between schools in the specified information technologies employed, a typical distance learning technology involves audio, video, and graphic links between two or more locations. Instructors and students typically use all of these media during the delivery of the course. These technologies offer several specific benefits. First, it allows the sharing of information and costs among multiple sites, giving schools that implement distance learning programs a competitive advantage (Webster & Hackley, 1997). Second, it provides educational opportunities for distant or disadvantaged locations, giving schools that offer distance learning programs an opportunity to tap new market segments (Walsh & Reese, 1995). Third, it introduces students to the information technology used by businesses (Leidner & Jarvenpaa, 1993).

Lengnick-Hall and Sanders (1997, p. 1335) recently suggested a definition of high-quality management education as a program that yields "(1) high levels of learning (e.g., increased knowledge, skill, and understanding, (2) high levels of change or intention to change behavior (application of new knowledge and skills), and (3) highly positive reactions (e.g., satisfaction with the course, the method of instruction, and the value of what was learned and intentions to recommend the course to others." This expanded definition of high quality management education recognizes participant reactions as an important component. Webster and Hackley (1997) examined student reactions in 29 distance learning courses at six North American Universities. The study included a variety of courses (accounting, chemistry, computer science, engineering, mathematics, physics, political science, and sociology) but did not include any management courses. Results suggested that technology reliability and quality are related to learning outcomes. This study also provided evidence that a more interactive instructional style (as opposed to straight lectures) is related to learning outcomes and student attitudes toward distance learning courses. However, it remains to be established whether similar results will be obtained with students registered for management distance learning courses.

DISTANCE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT

A wide variety of delivery formats are used in distance learning courses. Delivery mechanisms include interactive videos, television, Internet-based courses, compressed video, cable television and satellite broadcasting (Potashnik, 1998; Chadwick, 1995). Some formats permit one-on-one interaction between instructor and student (e.g., interactive videos, television, and satellite broadcasting), while others permit virtually no interaction (e.g., Internet-based courses, print media based courses, and complete on-line courses). Each format offers and presents unique advantages and disadvantages. The present research focuses on distance learning employing an interactive television format via satellite-broadcasting at a regional state university of approximately 10,000 students. Instructor's presentation of course material to on-site students is simultaneously broadcast to remote students at one or more distant location.

The distance learning courses examined in the present research are offered in a special classroom equipped with four big-screen TV's, located in each of the four corners of the classroom. Two monitors focus on the instructor while two more focus on the students. On-site and off-site facilitators manage the equipment. Instructors wear a microphone and have to restrict movement within the classroom in order to remain on camera. Instructors have the choice of writing on a regular chalkboard, or a "whiteboard." The whiteboard is similar to an overhead transparency projector and has a surface area large enough to hold an 8 1/2" by 11" sheet of paper. Most instructors used the whiteboard since they could use prepared notes. The on-site facilitator moves the camera between the instructor and the whiteboard. The remote-site facilitators focus the camera on students who have comments or questions. The classroom is also equipped with a telephone and a fax machine.

LITERATURE REVIEW AND HYPOTHESIS DEVELOPMENT

Distance learning technology is ideally suited for the non-traditional management student (i.e., age 25 or older, working full-time, and usually a part-time student). The U.S. Department of Education estimates that between 1972 and 1994, the percentage of non-traditional students enrolled in universities has increased by approximately one-third. Distance learning courses may particularly appeal to the non-traditional management student who lives and works some distance from a university campus. Rather than drive 30 to 60 minutes to campus to attend class, a much shorter drive to a distance-learning center of the same university may be a significant factor in these students' decision to return to school. This led to the development of the first two hypotheses.

H1a: A greater proportion of remote management students will be part-time students as compared with onsite management students.

H1b: The average age of the remote management students will be greater than the average age of the on-site management students.

Most research has found little or no difference between the grades of on-site versus remote students (Storck & Sproull, 1995; Wetzel, Radtke & Stern, 1994). One study of students enrolled in a cost accounting course, however, found that remote students outperformed on-site students (Seay & Milkman, 1994). This led to the second hypothesis.

H2: There will be no significant difference between the average grades of the remote and on-site management students.

Lengnick-Hall and Sanders (1997) include student reactions (e.g., satisfaction with the course and method of instruction) in their definition of high-quality management education. However, from a more practical perspective, continued growth in distance learning will depend, at least in part, on student perceptions of the quality of these courses and their general levels of satisfaction with them. Storck and Sproull (1995) suggest that on-site students should have a more positive perception of the quality of instruction since they have the benefit of face-to-face interaction with the instructor. They may also have better access to information and the instructor, and find it easier to be involved in the course. found that interactive teaching styles were positively correlated to learning outcomes such as student attitudes toward distant learning (Webster and Hackley, 1997; Alavi, Wheeler, and Valacich, 1995). Remote student comments mentioned not being able to see body language and facial expressions of the instructor. This led to the development of the third hypotheses.

H3a: On-site management students will have a more positive perception of the quality of instruction as compared to management remote students.

H3b: On-site management students will perceive the effectiveness of class discussion to be higher than remote management students.

While difficulty in observing body language and facial expressions as well as lack of face-to-face interaction with the instructor may be a problem for remote students during class discussions, it should not be a factor for group projects. Group assignments may be performed outside of class or in-class, but the primary interaction is within the group and not between students and the instructor. This led to the next hypothesis.

H4: There will be no significant difference between remote and on-site management students' perceptions of the effectiveness of group projects.

Several authors (Davis, Bagozzi & Warshaw, 1989; Goodhue and Thompson, 1995; Sandholtz, Ringstaff & Dwyer, 1992) note that the quality and reliability of the technology used in distance learning courses is an important influence on student perceptions of the quality of the course. While on-site students may not be effected as much by the quality and reliability of the technology, they are aware of service interruptions to the remote locations and class may be delayed while the instructor attempts to restore service. Webster and Hackley (1997) found that student attitudes toward the technology and toward distance learning in general were related to perceived instructor control of the technology. Instructors who were perceived to be uncomfortable with the technology or who had difficulty operating it affected student perceptions. This led to the following hypotheses.

H5a: There will be no significant difference between remote and on-site management students' perception of the quality of technology.

H5b: The perception of the quality and reliability of the technology used in the distance- learning course will be positively related to the management students' willingness to enroll in a future distance-learning course.

H5c: Management student perceptions of the instructor's knowledge of operating the distance learning equipment will be positively related to these students' willingness to enroll in a future distance-learning course.

In addition to the perceived quality of instruction and technology, another critical variable related to the quality of distance learning instruction is the support services provided by the institution. The support services examined in the present research relate to registration for the course, quality/reliability of the site facilitators, turnaround time for receiving materials from the instructor, and library services. A majority of the students, both on-site and remote, registered for classes using either the on-line Web registration system or the automated telephone registration system. Since location is not an influencing factoring this regard and the registration process is identical for both on-site and remote students, no difference is expected with regard to the registration process. Both on-site and remote locations use facilitators to operate the distance learning equipment. All facilitators received identical training, so no difference in on-site and remote student perceptions of the quality/reliability of facilitators is expected. Since remote students cannot receive materials from the instructor as quickly as those on-site, they are expected to view this less favorably than on-site students. Finally, it is expected that on-site students will have access to better library facilities as compared to remote students since off-campus/branch location library facilities are typically not as extensive as those available to students at the main campus. Based on the above, the following hypotheses are proposed with regard to support services.

H6a: There will be no significant difference between on-site and remote management students' perceptions of the quality of the registration process.

H6b: There will be no significant difference between on-site and remote management students' perceptions of the quality/reliability of site facilitators.

H6c: On-site management student perceptions of the turnaround time for receiving materials from instructors will be significantly more positive than those of remote management students.

H6d: On-site management students will rate the quality of library services more positively than remote students.

The advantages of distance learning technology pertain primarily to remote students. On-site students may see this technology directed at reaching remote sites as irrelevant, since they enroll in what appears for the large part as a traditional class that is being transmitted to remote locations. (A majority of distance learning courses were offered in the late evening hours and on-site students registered for these courses simply because all other classes were full). Remote students, in contrast, may be biased by the fact that in the absence of distance learning technology they may not have had the opportunity to enroll in these courses. It is expected that remote students will view the distance-learning course more favorably than on-site students. This led to the seventh hypotheses.

H7a: A higher proportion of remote students will perceive the courses in which they are enrolled as an appropriate course to be offered in the future via distance learning technology as compared with on-site students.

H7b: A higher proportion of remote management students will be willing to enroll in another distance learning course in the future as compared to on-site management students.

METHODOLOGY

Business students, both on-site and remote, enrolled in management distance learning courses at a regional state university were asked to complete a "Distance Learning Student Evaluation" questionnaire at the end of the semester. The questionnaire contained 20 questions, some using a five-point Likert scale, while others employed a "yes/no/undecided" option. In addition, the open-ended questions asked about the advantages and disadvantages of distance learning courses. Responses from 340 business students enrolled in a variety of management courses over a two-year time period (Fall 1996 to Spring 1998) were obtained. Since this was an end-of-course evaluation, a 100% response rate was achieved. The specific courses and the number of students enrolled on-site and at remote locations appear in Table 1.

The data were analyzed using a two-sample t-test to compare differences between on-site and remote students responses to the Likert scale questions, and a Chi-square test to compare differences of on-site and remote students responses on questions employing the "yes/no/undecided" response format.

RESULTS

Consistent with expectations, a significantly greater proportion of remote students (56%) are part-time students as compared to on-site students (44%) % (P = 51.81, p = 0.0000) (Table 2). Also, a significantly greater proportion of on-site students (83%) are full time students as compared to remote students (17%).

Also consistent with expectations, remote students' average age (31.79 years) is significantly higher than on-site students (average age 28.36 years) (t = 4.01, p = 0.00). These results support hypotheses H1a and H1b. Remote students tend to be nontraditional students while on-site students tend to be more traditional.

Consistent with Seay and Milkman (1994) but contrary to Storck and Sproull (1995), and Wetzel et. al (1994), the average grades (3.26/4.0) of the remote students is significantly higher (t = 3.04, p = 0.00) than the average grades of the on-site students (2.92/4.0). Hypothesis 2 is not supported.

On-site students were expected to have a more positive perception of the quality of instruction since they have the benefit of face-to-face interaction with the instructor and have better access to information about the material and the instructor. However, contrary to expectations, remote students had a significantly higher perception about the quality of instruction received as compared to the on-site students (t = 1.94, p = .03). The more important finding, however, was that both groups of students had a perception of high quality instruction (mean score of 4.28 for the remote students and 4.0 for the on-site students, on a scale of 5).

It was expected that on-site students would perceive the effectiveness of class discussions to be higher than remote students since a common problem associated with distance learning is the difficulty in eliciting active student involvement in class discussions. Contrary to expectations, however, remote students felt that the effectiveness of class discussions in a distance-learning environment was significantly higher as compared to the on-site students (t = 5.12, p = 0.00). Thus, Hypothesis 3b is not supported.

It was hypothesized that there will be no significant difference between remote and on-site students' perceptions of the effectiveness of group projects since both groups of students had similar opportunities for interaction with their respective group members. However, the results indicate that remote students had a significantly higher perception of the effectiveness of group projects than onsite students (t = 4.46, p = 0.00). Hypothesis 4 is not supported.

It was expected that there would be no significant difference between remote and on-site students' perception of the quality of technology used. Contrary to expectations (Hypothesis 5a), remote students have a significantly higher perception than on-site students (t = 1.79, p = 0.037). More importantly, both groups of students had a perception of high quality of technology being used (4.33 for the remote and 4.16 for the on-site students, on a scale of 5). However, consistent with expectations, the perception of the quality of technology used is significantly correlated to the students' willingness to enroll in a future distance-learning course (t = 3.16, p = 0.00). Hypothesis 5b is supported.

Also consistent with expectations, the perception of the instructors knowledge of operating the distance learning equipment is significantly correlated to the students' willingness to enroll in a future distance learning course (t = 2.58, p = 0.01), supporting Hypothesis 5c.

Next, student responses to the support services provided were examined. Contrary to expectations, remote students rated the registration facility and the quality/reliability of the site facilitator significantly higher than the on-site students (t = 2.25, p = 0.01 and t = 7.07, p = 0.00) respectively. Due to geographical reasons, on-site students were expected to rate the turnaround time for receiving materials back from the instructor more favorably than the remote students. The results were contrary to expectations with no significant difference between on-site and remote students with respect to the turnaround time for receiving materials back from the instructor (t = 0.54, p = 0.295). Finally, it was expected that on-site students would rate the library services more favorably than the remote students. However, the results indicate that there was no significant difference in this regard (t = 0.07, p = 0.47). Thus, no support was provided for Hypotheses 6a through 6d.

Consistent with expectations (Hypothesis 7a), a significantly higher proportion of remote students (x [??] 11.46, 0.0025 < p > 0.005) felt that the course they were enrolled in was an appropriate course to be offered in future in a distance learning environment (Table 3). A more interesting finding, however, was the fact that an overwhelming majority of both remote (90%) and on-site students (73%) were of the opinion that it was appropriate to offer the distance-learning course in future.

Also consistent with expectations (Hypothesis 7b), a significantly higher proportion of remote students (x [??] 36.08, p < 0.005) stated that they would be willing to enroll in another distance learning course in future (Table 4). A more interesting finding, however, was the fact that an overwhelming majority of both remote (97%) and on-site students (65%) were in favor of this medium of instruction.

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND IMPLICATIONS

Distance learning technology is reaching non-traditional students who otherwise might not be able to attend college due to family and career commitments. Distance learning courses are becoming increasingly common on many college campuses. However, there is surprisingly little research examining its effectiveness and student reactions to their distance learning experience.

This is particularly true of business students. This research addressed reactions of students enrolled in management distance learning courses.

As expected, remote students enrolled in management distance learning courses tend to be non-traditional (older and part-time) in comparison to on-site students. Also as expected, management students' perceptions of the quality of technology were related to their willingness to enroll in a future distance-learning course. Expectations that remote management students perceived the course they were enrolled in as appropriate to be offered via distance learning technology and that remote students would be more willing to enroll in another distance learning course in the future than on-site students were also supported by the findings.

However, a number of expectations were not supported by the findings. Surprisingly, nine of fifteen hypotheses were not supported in the present research! Based on previous research that involved primarily non-business students as subjects, several expected differences between on-site and remote students were not observed in this research. In addition, several unexpected differences between on-site and remote students were found. However, an interesting pattern exists in the results. In the case of every hypothesis that was not supported, remote students reported more positive perceptions of their distance learning experience, and they out-performed their on-site counterparts.

The present research did not address explanations for these results. However, one possible explanation is that the results reflect a type of halo error. That is, remote students are thankful for the opportunity to attend college without long commutes and therefore, their perceptions of the experience is shaded by their appreciation of the distance learning course. However, this would not explain the remote students outperforming on-site students. There is some evidence that suggests that non-traditional students tend to outperform traditional students (Ely, 1997). Thus, the differences in performance are the result of more non-traditional students in the remote locations.

Future research is needed to explore explanations for these differences in perceptions between onsite and remote students.

In conclusion, the overall positive perceptions of students, both on-site and remote, with respect to quality of instruction, effectiveness of class discussions, group projects, quality of technology, and support services, are a clear and strong indication that appropriate use of this media of instruction has the potential to contribute significantly to creating a pedagogically effective learning environment.

REFERENCES

Alavi, M., B.C. Wheeler, & J.S. Valacich (1995). Using IT to reengineer business education: An exploratory investigation of collaborative telelearning, MIS Quarterly, 19: 293-312.

Chadwick, J. (1995). How learning is aided by technology, Link-Up, 12(2): 30-31.

Davis, F.D., R.P. Bagozzi, and P.R. Warshaw (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35, 982, 1003.

Ely, E.E. (1997). The non-traditional student. Presented at the American Association of Community Colleges Annual Conference, April 12-15.

Goodhue, D.L. and R.L. Thompson (1995). Task-technology fit and individual performance. MIS Quarterly, 19: 213-236.

Green, K. (1996). Nontraditional education: Alternative ways to earn your credentials. Occupational Outlook Quarterly, 40(2): 22-35.

Gubernick, L. & A. Ebeling (1997). I got my degree through E-mail. Forbes, 159 (June 16): 84-92.

Hildebrand, J.E. (1995). Videoconferencing in the business curriculum. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 9: 228-240.

Hubbard, S. (1997). Teaching courses through distance education, Cornell Hotel & Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 38(4): 82-86.

Leidner, D.E. & S.L. Jarvenpaa (1993). The information age confronts education: Case studies on electronic classrooms. Information Systems Research, 4: 24-54.

Lengnick-Hall, C.A. & M.M. Sanders (1997). Designing effective learning systems for management education: Student roles, requisite variety, and practicing what we teach. Academy of Management Journal, 40: 1334-1368.

Potashnik, M. (1998). Distance education: Growth and diversity. Finance and Development, 35(1): 42-45.

Sandholtz, J.H., C. Ringstaff & D.C. Dwyer (1992). Teaching in hi-tech environments: Classroom management revisited. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 8: 479-5-5.

Seay, R.A. & M.I. Milkman, (1994). Interactive television instruction: An assessment of student performance and attitudes in an upper division accounting course. Issues in Accounting Education, 9: 80-95.

Storck, J. & L. Sproull. (1995). Through a glass darkly: What do people learn in videoconferences? Human Communication Research, 22: 197-219.

Vasarhelyi, M.A. & L. Graham (1997). Cybersmart: Education and the Internet. Management Accounting (imastudents.org Supplement), 32-36.

Walsh, J. & B. Reese (1995). Distance learning's growing reach. Technological Horizons in Education Journal, 22(11): 58-62.

Webster, J. & P. Hackley (1997). Teaching effectiveness in technology-mediated distance learning. Academy of Management Journal, 40: 1282-1309.

Wetzel, C.D., P.H. Radke & H.W. Stern (1994). Instructional effectiveness of video media. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Sanjay Gupta, Valdosta State University

Mel E. Schnake, Valdosta State University

TABLE 1

Course Semester # of Students Enrolled

 On-Site Remote Total

Organizational
 Behavior &
 Management Fall 96 23 25 48
International
 Management Spring 97 25 16 41
Production &
 Operations
 Management Summer 97 26 16 42
Human Resources
 Management Summer 97 33 16 49
Organizational
 Analysis & Design Fall 97 25 15 40
Small Business
 Management Winter 97 25 18 43
Fundamentals of
 Information Systems Winter 97 21 16 37
Administration of
 Business Information
 Systems Spring 98 26 14 40
Total 204 136 340

TABLE 2

Student status On-site Remote Total

Full time 116 (83%) 24 (17%) 140
Part time 88 (44%) 112 (56%) 200
Total 204 136 340

TABLE 3
"Do you feel that this is an appropriate course to be
offered in the future via distance learning"

Response On-site Remote Total

Yes 107 (73%) 90 (90%) 197
No 24 (16%) 6 (6%) 30
Undecided 17 (11%) 4 (4%) 21
Total 148 100 248

TABLE 4
Do you feel that this is an appropriate course to
be offered in the future via distance learning

Response On-site Remote Total

Yes 95 (65%) 97 (97%) 192
No 29 (20%) 2 (2%) 31
Undecided 23 (15%) 1 (1%) 24
Total 147 100 247