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