VOL. 13, No. 1, 21-39
The purpose of this investigation was to examine perspectives of university faculty and students currently involved in one medium of distance education, Web-based instruction. Students and faculty were surveyed on the advantages, disadvantages, and general effectiveness of using the Internet as a teaching and learning tool. Findings indicated that the student benefits included (a) meaningful learning of technology through the integration of course content and computer applications, (b) increased access to the most current and global content information available, (c) increased motivation, and (d) convenience. Faculty reported a wide range of challenges in the development and delivery of Web-based instruction. The most frequently identified barriers included (a) lack of technical support, (b) lack of software/adequate equipment, (c) lack of faculty/administrative support, (d) the amount of preparation time required to create assignments, and (e) student resistance. In addition, faculty respondents consistently identified convenience and improved learning as advantages for students enrolled in Web-based instruction.
Cette enquête visait à examiner les perceptions de professeurs et d’étudiants universitaires utilisant le web comme mode d’éducation à distance. Leurs avis sur les avantages, les désavantages et l’efficacité du web en tant qu’outil d’enseignement et d’apprentissage ont été recensés. Au nombre des avantages pour les apprenants, on a cité : (a) un apprentissage fructueux de la technologie grâce à l’intégration des contenus de cours et des applications informatiques, (b) un accès accru aux contenus informationnels les plus récents à l’échelle de la planète, (c) une motivation accrue, et (d) la commodité. Le corps enseignant citait une large gamme de difficultés tant à développer qu’à dispenser une formation basée sur l’usage du web. Au nombre des obstacles les plus souvent cités, on trouve : (a) une insuffisance de soutien technique, (b) une insuffisance de logiciels ou d’équipements adaptés, (c) une insuffisance de soutien professoral ou administratif, (d) le temps de préparation exigé par la conception des travaux pratiques, et (e) la résistance des étudiants. Les professeurs interrogés ont également, et systématiquement, cité parmi les avantages pour les étudiants la commodité et une amélioration de l’apprentissage.
We are at a point in the history of higher education when radical changes are occurring in instructional delivery system models. Universities are witnessing a profound increase in the use of multimedia presentations, video teleconferencing, and, more currently, Web-based course instruction. These technological innovations have a direct impact on current university practices and policies and subsequently have the potential to alter our traditional definitions of education. For example, Web-based instruction is already revolutionizing how students work, think, and access information (Peck & Dorricott, 1994). In addition, a virtual learning environment is not confined to a particular space or time as evidenced by conventional college course offerings.
It is apparent that the emergence of distance education in traditional higher education has altered and will continue greatly to alter teaching and learning contexts in our universities. However, there is little research on the effects of these changes. Studying various approaches for integrating technology and instruction, and the results of those efforts, will address the role of distance education in university instruction more responsibly and, we hope, ensure and protect academic quality for our students. The main focus of this study was to gain insights into critical issues confronting two major stakeholders at the university level, the student and the teacher.
Web-based instruction (WBI) is defined as an innovative approach for delivering instruction to a remote audience using the World Wide Web as the instructional delivery system (Khan, 1997). Web-based learning environments use the resources of the Web to create a context in which learning is supported and fostered. The Web offers many unique characteristics and features for both educator and student. These attributes range from cost effectiveness from a university business perspective to convenience and flexibility of structure for the student (Jafari, 1997; Kubala, 1998). The Web can also provide a wealth of information to students that is not readily available in textbooks or faculty lectures. Students can access information and resources from around the world simply by having a computer with an Internet connection. The information is usually current, presented in meaningful contexts, and affords students the opportunity to explore more widely a topic, interest, or fact. In addition, WBI can be interactive and collaborative in nature resulting in what many call a global community. Through e-mail, listservs, conferencing tools, and newsgroups a virtual community of learners can exchange knowledge, ideas, and perspectives.
Currently, WBI is growing faster than any other instructional technology (Crossman, 1997). More and more university faculty are using WBI as an integral part of instructional activities. The rationale for providing this platform for learning is sound. Higher education cannot operate in isolation and must respond to societal change (Innovations in Distance Education [IDE], 1997). WBI offers one medium for higher education to accommodate the information age and a networked world. Indeed, WBI has the potential to replace traditional university-level education altogether and could provide a catalyst for a total reconceptualization of education in general.
However, as in any new approach to teaching and learning, critical issues need to be examined before WBI is subsumed and adopted into university practices. Ultimately, it is not the numerous unique features that will determine WBI’s effectiveness as a teaching tool. WBI is only a vehicle for designing a learning context, one approach, one strategy for conveying knowledge to individuals (Clark, 1994). The pedagogical soundness of this medium involves many factors that have yet to be investigated fully (Reeves & Reeves, 1997). Recent literature on WBI indicates that there are indeed many considerations that will affect the potential of WBI’s success. Increased attention is being given in the distance education literature to the key players in this innovative change, the university faculty member and student.
A review of the literature conducted by Dillon and Walsh (1992) indicates that faculty involved in distance education endeavors gain more positive attitudes as their experiences with distance education projects increase. However, faculty are consistently concerned with the integrity and quality of the teaching/learning process that occurs with their work. One primary concern centers on the degree of interactivity present with distance learning delivery systems (Yong & Wang, 1996). Negative attitudes of faculty are also apparent when the issues of time and support are factored into the development of WBI (IDE, 1997; Metcalf, 1997). The recognition that a quality product takes time to design, develop, and implement has not yet been reflected in many university funding policies. Therefore, many faculty express the need for additional support and compensation to meet expectations concerning WBI. In addition, faculty cite lack of training and course development opportunities to help them effectively employ distance learning techniques and methods (Shotsberger, 1997). Gilbert (1997) also reports that faculty must have sufficient technical support, equipment, and software, and that these resources may not be available at many institutions. These concerns are often reflected in the literature as a need for faculty to have incentives for WBI development.
University students’ perspectives of WBI are varied but generally positive. Many students report that the convenience of this medium meets the needs of the now common nontraditional student who also has work and family responsibilities. Access to a large quantity of information and the interactivity of the Internet are two consistent assets of WBI cited by many students (Schweir & Misanchuk, 1993). In addition, there is evidence to show that Web-related instructional activities increase student motivation and self-esteem (Kearsley, 1996). However, an important criterion for student satisfaction appears to be related to the degree of interactivity between instructor and student, the design of the course, and the instructor’s philosophy of education (Kearsley & Moore, 1996). A resulting phenomenon often related to these issues is a feeling of isolation felt by the student based on the physical separation between student and instructor (Swartz, 1997). Still another concern consistently reported in the literature is the level of experience and skill needed by students to negotiate and manage completing coursework effectively on the Web.
This brief examination of current literature demonstrates mixed reviews on various aspects of Web-based instruction for both faculty and students. The purpose of this research was to study further the perspectives of these two populations with a focus on WBI. Feedback from university students and instructors involved in Web course activities was gathered to investigate the advantages, disadvantages, and general effectiveness of using WBI as a teaching and learning tool.
Samples for the study included both university students and faculty involved in WBI. Participants were asked to complete a structured survey about their experiences related to Web-based course activities. Survey questions were open-ended allowing for generated data that did not impose predetermined responses. Respondents’ answers to the questions were comprehensive and provided vivid descriptions of perspectives of instruction and learning via the World Wide Web.
Nineteen graduate students and 36 undergraduate students enrolled in WBI coursework at a southeastern university participated in the study. All of the student participants were recruited because of their involvement in Web-based course activities.
The graduate students were public school teachers completing a master’s level graduate program in education. These students completed the initial offering of an online educational research course available at a password protected Internet site. Technology was defined for them as computer skills or experience with electronic media, tools, and software and use of the Internet. Twenty percent of the class had little or no experience with using technology prior to enrolling in the course. Fifty percent of the students had moderate experience, whereas 30% characterized their previous experience as extensive.
The 36 undergraduate students completed a traditional health science course on human sexuality that incorporated Web-based assignments as one segment of course requirements. The surveyed participants were upper level students who were either taking the course to satisfy a course requirement in a major field of study or as an elective. Most of the students were health science majors or middle school education majors taking a concentration in health science. Forty-four percent of the students had little or no prior experience with technological tools, whereas 53% categorized their technology background as moderate. Only one student had extensive experience with computer applications prior to the course.
Seventy-six university faculty members participated in the study. University faculty members were sampled by posting the survey to six listservs, most of which focused on technology and education. One unexpected deviation from the sampling occurred in that several responses were received from faculty members who stated that the survey had been forwarded to them by another colleague with an invitation to respond.
Like the student respondents, faculty were asked to rate their degree of experience with technological applications. Forty-six percent cited extensive experience, whereas 47% said their background was moderate. Nine percent of the respondents had minimal experience, and no one classified himself or herself as lacking experience. Faculty were also invited to identify the most commonly used applications. The request generated a comprehensive list that varied considerably according to the expertise and content background of the individual faculty member. The most commonly cited basic tools were e-mail, word-processing software, authoring editors, and Power Point. Less common applications included statistical programs and conferencing software.
It is important to note that the concept of posting surveys to listservs as a sampling technique is relatively new, and more data are needed to ascertain the validity of this method of data collection. Individuals who join and participate in listservs have characteristics that separate them from the general population. Consequently, a listserv sample cannot be considered representative of the general university faculty population.
Survey questions covered numerous topics and issues related to Web-based course instruction and learning. Items ranged from the educational benefits of WBI to attitudinal perspectives of incorporating technology into coursework. Two initial questions gathered background information on the respondents related to technological skills and experiences.
Student survey. Tables 1 and 2 present the survey questions that students answered. A common set of 16 structured, open-ended survey items that focused on various facets of WBI was designed for student participants in the study. The sequence of the items remained the same for each surveyed group. However, questions in the survey were reworded or extended to address the unique perspectives of each participating sample. For example, survey items administered to the graduate students sampled characteristics of completing a course that was entirely Web-based, whereas undergraduate students answered questions related to incorporating Web-based course activities in a traditional course.
Student participants were asked to make comparisons between traditional instruction and WBI, to identify significant learning experiences, and to rate WBI according to difficulty compared with traditional classroom activities. Survey items also invited comments on their favorite and least favorite Web-related activities. Students were asked to identify their attitudes toward using technology and to indicate if their attitudes changed as a result of completing Web-based assignments. In addition, students were polled on the quality and quantity of communication patterns among fellow students and the instructor and their perspectives of the disadvantages and advantages of WBI.
Faculty survey. Table 3 provides survey questions that faculty completed for the study. University faculty were asked to complete seven structured, open-ended questions related to WBI. Survey questions emphasized the development and instruction of Web-based coursework. Participants were asked to identify advantages for themselves and for students, and to identify barriers or challenges associated with WBI. In addition, faculty were asked to comment on their experiences in developing WBI at their various institutions and to offer suggestions on making that experience easier for other interested faculty.
The 19 graduate students participating in the study completed an online educational research course. Content for the class was organized into 15 units with numerous Internet links providing supplemental information throughout the course content. Student requirements included exercises and assignments at the conclusion of each unit and a formal paper that reviewed current research on a topic of interest. Students were also asked to complete a response journal via e-mail to the instructor periodically throughout the course. The journal required students to analyze and evaluate their work and the processes and skills they used to complete assignments.
Communication with the instructor and classmates was achieved through e-mail, chat rooms, and listservs. In addition, three face-to-face encounters were planned during the quarter. These sessions consisted of one group orientation on the main campus and two compressed videoconferencing classes involving students gathered at three remote sites in the state.
The 36 undergraduate study participants completed a traditional health science course that incorporated technological applications into class requirements. Web-based class assignments required students to access numerous health-related websites and answer specific questions, perform various tasks such as using search engines, and explore sections of websites and write their reaction. One sample activity included visiting sites that discussed the issue of freedom of speech on the WWW as applied to sexuality-related material. Students were to read opinions on both sides of the issue and then formulate and write their own opinion. An initial training session in a university computer lab was provided for the students to teach them the basic skills needed to complete Web-based assignments.
All student participants were asked to complete the survey after their final grades for the course had been calculated and processed. The students were told to be honest and thorough in their responses and that the data gathered would be used for course evaluation purposes. Graduate students answered survey questions online, whereas undergraduate students completed their surveys in a traditional college classroom.
One additional data source was used to supplement study findings. A log activity analysis was conducted after the completion of the online graduate educational research course. The analyses provided descriptive statistics on the frequency of course entry by students, the number of times specific instructional units were entered, and the most commonly used time of day or night that students accessed the course.
The 76 faculty participants were obtained through posting the survey to six listservs. These were chosen by conducting a search to identify listservs with a focus on combining technology and education. The listservs were joined, and the activity on the listserv was monitored to determine if the audience was appropriate for the survey. The purpose of the study was explained, and directions for completing the survey were provided.
The main purposes of the study were to gather evaluative feedback from university students and faculty on Web-based instruction. Open-ended responses to survey questions precipitated a descriptive approach to data analysis. To ensure reliability of data findings, three independent readers took part in the data analysis process. First, survey responses were systematically transformed and aggregated into units to permit precise description of relevant content characteristics (Holsti, 1969). Item responses were transcribed, coded, and categorized within each question to determine similar answers. Second, categorized data were tabulated and frequency counts were generated. Intercoder reliability was established through comparison of tallied categorized data by the three independent coders. Specific patterns of responses in individual questions were identified in the comparative process. Individual item patterns were then compared across survey questions to identify consistent repetitious threads in the quality and content of responses. Finally, frequency counts of commonly agreed on categorized data were then converted to percentages for reporting purposes. Findings that were consistently noted in the analyses are identified and discussed.
Table 4 identifies findings of student responses on the advantages and benefits of Web-based instruction. Results showed some specific common threads within and across student responses. Most students acknowledged the utility of the World Wide Web as a current and extensive source of information and one that was relatively easy to access. Students often referred to the “discovery” of learning through the Internet compared with traditional classroom domains. Several students expanded on the limitation of knowledge in a typical college course constrained by textbooks and lecture, and remarked that the Internet was a source of information previously unimagined. For example, graduate students commented on the availability and value of resources that directly related to their teaching profession. WWW links that supported content in the course connected them to relevant events and issues addressed by educators involved in action research and experts in the field of education. Undergraduate students noted that they were given access to references that illustrated and extended classroom discussions. Subsequently, students appeared genuinely impressed by the variety and quality of learning materials offered via the Web.
Data revealed that a by-product of students’ piqued interest in sources on the Web was an increased motivation to learn. This development was perhaps best reflected by one student who declared, “I would go from one link to another, reading and reading more, and before I knew it an entire morning was gone.” Furthermore, they gave evidence that access to meaningful resources fostered critical thinking skills and allowed them to see new ways of interpreting and evaluating information. For example, several students acknowledged that gathering viewpoints and knowledge at Internet sites caused them to debate previously held values and ideas. Illustrations of analytical thinking were apparent after students visited one controversial Internet site on human sexuality. One student stated, “I had not ever considered thinking this way before,” and another remarked, “This site was very informative. It cleared up some misconceptions I think a lot of us had before.” Another example was noted when graduate students consistently cited that they had not been able to relate educational research to the practicality of day-to-day teaching until they had engaged with Internet-published action research projects conducted by teachers in the field. As one student put it, “I now have an appreciation for the validity of educational research that I did not have before completing this class because I never had made the connection between research findings, trends in education, and actually completing research daily in a classroom.”
One of the most interesting patterns found in the data was noted when students were asked to identify and rate the three most important pieces of information that the Internet-based assignments had taught them. Across all responses, the strongest learning experiences were related to technology, with content related knowledge demonstrating a secondary but supportive role. Students repeatedly rated some aspect of computer applications as the number one educational experience associated with the activities they had completed. Some of the most frequently mentioned responses were (a) learning to navigate and use the Web successfully, (b) to apply computer skills, and (c) to use conferencing tools such as e-mail and listservs. These findings revealed that students gained competence with technology and that their newfound capabilities were important to them. Comments from this survey item also suggested that the integration of technology with content-related work provided a more meaningful interaction with subject matter. For example, several students reflected on the lack of relevance in acquiring computer skills in isolation noting that, when combined with content, those applications become a tool to improve learning in their field of study. One student supported this contention with the statement, “I feel like I’ve completed two courses, one in technology and one in educational research, and they were mixed together nicely.”
An important issue addressed in the literature on WBI that was examined in this study pertained to interactivity between students and instructor with Internet-based coursework. Surprisingly, 63% of the graduate students and 55% of the undergraduate students were positive about the degree and quality of communication among classmates and with instructors while participating in online activities. For example, 77% of the undergraduate student responses for survey question #8 revealed that technological aspects of course assignments encouraged cooperative dialogues rather than isolation. Students reported that e-mail and listservs were used regularly, without reservation, and that these tools provided a valuable resource for support and collaboration among classmates. Survey responses demonstrated that the students communicated with classmates for help in completing assignments, support with technology frustrations, and to share acquired skills or content resources. Students also felt that e-mail communications with the instructor gave them individual attention that was not often apparent in traditional coursework. For example, one student stated, “I believe I conversed more on a one-to-one level with the instructor than in any other course I’ve taken.”
Students also remarked on the utility of e-mail, stating that it had many assets that face-to-face classroom contact lacked. One student elaborated on this point by stating that when she had a question, she did not have to wait until class time as in traditional instruction. She merely sent an e-mail. The same student noted another advantage of e-mail with the comment, “E-mail is better than a phone call because there is no chance that you’re interrupting someone’s dinner hour.” Several students mentioned that they felt comfortable communicating through the format of e-mail and listservs. One student in particular stated, “I’m shy and I normally would never ask a question in class or participate in a class discussion. E-mail gave me the freedom to do this.” These positive aspects of WBI were countered with some frustrations expressed by students. According to survey responses, 13% of undergraduate students and 26% of graduate students experienced such problems as the “server being down,” “difficulty accessing a computer,” and a “lack of skills” in using technology. Some students who completed assignments in university computer labs were also discouraged with older computers and lack of technical and instructional support. Consequently, these respondents noted that the required assignments were time-consuming. Students with personal home computers also commented that initial encounters with completing activities were lengthy. Mastering computer application tools and learning to navigate the Web efficiently commanded the most time.
Although they acknowledged initial difficulties, most students described how they adapted quickly and learned appropriate procedures and processes. However, a few students were repeatedly frustrated with their experiences. Some of these respondents openly attributed their problems to lack of technological skills, and further data analysis supported this assertion. Students whose responses expressed doubts consistently indicated in the initial background questions that they had little experience with technology. Subsequently, findings revealed that previous training with computer applications was one variable that influenced how students perceived their own degree of competence when completing WBI activities.
Although commonalities of responses were apparent across student survey responses, a unique group perspective was also identified in the data analysis (see Table 4). Graduate students enrolled in the online course consistently cited some specific attributes of WBI that were not apparent in the undergraduate students’ responses. It is important to acknowledge that this sample consisted of students who were primarily employed teachers, mostly female, and married with families. Most of these respondents commented that an online course allowed them to integrate work, family, and school more efficiently. Several individuals elaborated on the convenience of completing coursework in their own homes and at times that accommodated family activities. Furthermore, students with young children provided numerous examples of how child care was handled easily while completing the course. Many students printed coursework to read during free times in the day and cited this as a convenience not previously experienced in a traditional coursework. One student illustrated this pattern of behavior with the statements, “After I printed a unit, I could read and reread the information as often as I felt necessary. This made the course available to me whenever I wanted it and for as long as I needed in order to understand the material.”
In addition, most graduate students (52%) used the phrase time saver in conjunction with descriptions of their experiences. For example, one student commented on the advantages of WBI with these remarks, “The top two advantages of taking a course this way are convenience and saving time. In this day and time, as busy as everybody is, a few minutes saved here and there can really add up.” Students also indicated taking a course online eliminated travel time to and from class for commuters.
Course log analysis was conducted at the conclusion of the academic quarter. The analysis generated frequency counts and mean percentages of file transfers by hour of the day and day of the week over the span of the quarter. Resulting statistics supported the convenience of WBI as an important factor by revealing that the course was accessed by students every hour of the day. The most popular times that students participated in online work were 5:00-6:00 p.m. (6.96%) and 10:00-11:00 p.m. (5.34%), whereas the least popular times were 1:00-2:00 p.m. (2.98%) and 2:00-3:00 p.m. (2.96%). Students entered the course quite often late at night and early in the morning. For example, the average percentage of course entry for 4:00-5:00 a.m. was 3.01% and 4.85% for 11:00 p.m.-12:00 midnight. Mondays (17.80%) and Tuesdays (16.79%) were the most popular days that the course was accessed whereas Sunday (11.36%) and Friday (11.33%) were the least favorite days.
In addition, the graduate student sample also commented that they liked the self-paced nature of participating in Web-based instruction. This appreciation was best reflected in one student’s statements, “This format does well for self-motivated, mature students. It allows students to work any place, any time, and with any schedule.” Another student supported this contention with, “A Web-based course teaches more than material or content. It teaches self-discipline and good time management skills.” Still another student extended a similar perspective with, “Having a class online allows for more flexibility and a self-paced format. You have to have good time management skills. I think a course like this also teaches the importance of self-discipline and student accountability.”
Faculty were asked open ended questions about their experiences with WBI. The questions focused on challenges or barriers they faced in incorporating technology applications in their courses; the benefits to students who take the courses with the technology applications; if they will continue with this practice, and what suggestions would they offer to someone who is considering incorporating technology applications into their courses. Faculty reported a wide range of challenges in the development and delivery of Web-based instruction. The most frequently identified barriers included: (a) lack of technical support; (b) lack of software/adequate equipment; (c) lack of faculty/administrative support; (d) the amount of preparation time required to create assignments; and (e) student lack of knowledge/resistance (see Table 5).
Respondents identified several benefits or advantages to students. The advantage most frequently identified by faculty (38%) was that students gain knowledge on how to use numerous technology-based applications such as e-mail, PowerPoint, listservs, graphics programs, and HTML, many of which are considered essential skills for today’s workforce. Students also gain comfort with the medium, anxiety levels are reduced, and they are more willing to explore the potential of technology applications.
Another benefit identified by 32% of faculty related to improved learning. Students tend to become independent learners, are more motivated to explore related topics on their own, and develop critical thinking skills. The quality of completed assignments is often better than in the traditional classroom because students have more time for reflection and better access to resources. More information can be included in a course with the potential for students to expand on the information received by providing links to related sites. Many students will click on a link more readily than obtaining a print resource identified in a bibliography.
Learning how to access the extensive resources available on the WWW, online databases, and other technology-based resources was considered a benefit to students by 26% of faculty. Another advantage cited by 16% of faculty was in the area of student convenience. For example, online classes provide students with 24-hour access, eliminate the need to travel or find parking, and eliminate scheduling conflicts with jobs or family. These advantages may particularly benefit graduate students and nontraditional students.
A final advantage identified by 25% of faculty related to improved communication. Connecting students with technology allows the student to become part of a global community. Information and ideas can be exchanged with other students and experts throughout the world using e-mail and listserv discussions. Collaboration and communication among students are fostered, as well as communication between instructor and student.
When faculty were asked if they would continue to incorporate technology applications into coursework, the overwhelming majority (99%) of the respondents said Yes. There were a few faculty who, despite affirmative responses, cited concerns about the time expenditure required, wanting to see if technical barriers could be removed, and wanting more training or experience.
Technology applications in university courses was considered by faculty as the wave of the future. Several faculty members (26%) cited their main reason for wanting to continue to use technology applications was due to the benefits they believed their students receive. Eleven percent of faculty stated that technology-based applications are fun, new, exciting, challenging, and allow for more creativity for the faculty member compared with traditional instructional methodologies. A few faculty (4%) noted that it was expected or required by universities or specific departments. Stated reasons for this requirement were that higher education is evolving, consumer needs are shifting, and competition for students is increasing. Consequently, institutions must be driven to some extent by the needs and demands of the consumer. To satisfy the unique needs of growing numbers of nontraditional students and to make graduate degrees more attractive and feasible, the availability of online courses and distance learning opportunities will be essential. In addition, a faculty member who does not use technology is often considered out of date and out of touch with skills that are needed for the coming millennium.
Faculty who have been involved in WBI were asked to provide suggestions for others who would like to implement WBI in their courses. A consistent recommendation emphasized the large time expenditure required compared with teaching traditional courses and strongly encouraged faculty to plan accordingly. Obtaining release time the semester before the course is offered was considered ideal, and a course reduction when the course is offered was also suggested. Advance preparation for faculty was emphasized, including reading about WBI, looking at existing courses, talking to others who have already implemented courses, finding a mentor who will offer guidance, and obtaining training to sharpen technology skills. Faculty recommended starting small, keeping it simple initially, relying on generic tools, and adding complexity as skill and experience are gained. Faculty may also benefit from taking time to prepare students who will take the course to ensure that they have basic skills such as using e-mail and navigating websites.
Several personal characteristics were identified as being helpful in this process including patience, perseverance, flexibility, willingness to experiment with various applications, ability to ignore the anxiety that the new technology creates, and a sense of humor. Faculty also encouraged others not to lose sight of the educational process amid the crush of technology and to humanize the course as much as possible. Last but not least, it was suggested to try to ensure that technical support will be available and always to have contingency plans for the inevitable technology difficulties that will be encountered.
The results of this study support much of the current literature on WBI. Both university faculty and students report that WBI can be an effective tool for the teaching and learning process (Schweir & Misanchuk, 1993), that it has the potential to increase student motivation (Kearsley, 1996), and that it offers specific attributes such as student convenience not often considered in traditional course instruction (Crossman, 1997). Common concerns often cited in the literature were also experienced by the study’s participants. Faculty consistently identified the need for additional time and incentives for adequate development and instruction via the Web, and both faculty and student samples emphasized technical support and training as a necessity for successful WBI (Metcalf, 1997; Yong & Wang, 1996).
Findings that deviated from the literature were slight except with the issue pertaining to interactivity and WBI. Survey responses from both populations tended to be positive and enthusiastic about the various forms of communication such as e-mail and listservs experienced with Internet-based course activities. Moreover, many students identified e-mail as a tool that offered advantages that were not often apparent in face-to-face instructor-student interactions. Data findings reveal that WBI does indeed have the potential to be highly interactive and can promote satisfying and effective communication patterns between instructors and students.
One profound finding from the study demonstrated that for some populations the convenience afforded by WBI is a definite advantage. Graduate student study participants consistently indicated that WBI could be easily integrated into their daily lives, much more so than enrolling in traditional college coursework. A conclusion that may be drawn from the data findings is that technologically based media may respond to specific individual and group learning styles, needs, and dynamics.
In conclusion, it is important to note that this study found faculty and student perceptions of WBI reflected and supported each other. Faculty recognized the benefits that students received, with most responses referring to the potential of the Web as a strong source of information, a tool for incorporating current technology into instruction, and a vehicle for meeting the needs of nontraditional students. Students echoed the same benefits. Concurrently, both populations acknowledged the need for adequate technological training and support as a prerequisite for successful WBI experiences. The commonality of perspectives among these two distinct groups demonstrates that the key stakeholders in higher education, the instructor and student, have similar interpretations of the qualities and characteristics related to WBI. This finding suggests a strong bond of agreement in university communities on the potential of WBI as a teaching and learning tool, thus increasing the likelihood of its playing an even more important role in higher education in coming years.
Clark, R.E. (1994). Media will never influence learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), 21-29.
Crossman, D.M. (1997). The evolution of the World Wide Web as an emerging technology tool. In B.H. Kahn (Ed.), Web-based instruction (pp. 19-25). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Dillon, C.L., & Walsh, S.M. (1992). Faculty: The neglected resource in distance education. American Journal of Distance Education, 6(3), 5-21.
Gilbert <gilbert@clark.net> AAHESGIT170: Benefits and support service crisis. (1997, July 26). Electronic distribution list (29 August 1997).
Holsti, O.R. (1969). Content analysis for the social sciences and humanities. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Innovations in Distance Education [IDE]. (1997). The report of two policy symposia. http:www.cde.psu.edu/de/ide/policy.default.html (10 December, 1997).
Jafari, A. (1997). Issues in distance education. T.H.E. Journal [Online]. Avaliable: http://www.thejournal.com/past/OCT/1097exclu3.html.
Kearsley, G. (1996). The World Wide Web: Global access to education. Educational Technology Review, 5, 26-30.
Kearsley, G., & Moore, M.G. (1996). Distance education: A systems view. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Khan, B.H. (1997). Web-based instruction (WBI): What is it and why is it? In B.H. Kahn (Ed.), Web-based instruction (pp. 5-19). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Kubala, T. (1998). Addressing student needs: Teaching on the Internet. T.H.E. Journal [Online]. Available: http://www.thejournal.com/98/mar/3 98feat4.html.
Metcalf, T. (1997). Distance education: The issue of faculty time. 5th Annual Distance Education Conference: 1997 Conference Proceedings. Texas A & M, Center for Distance Education Research.
Peck, K.L., & Dorricott, D. (1994). Why use technology? Educational Leadership, 51(7), 11-14.
Reeves, T.C., & Reeves, P.M. (1997). Effective dimensions of interactive learning on the World Wide Web. In B.H. Kahn (Ed.), Web-based instruction (pp. 59-67). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Schweir, R.A., & Misanchuk, E.R. (1993). Interactive multimedia instruction. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Shotsberger, P.G. (1997). Emerging roles for instructors and learners in the Web-based instruction classroom. In B.H. Kahn (Ed.), Web-based instruction (pp.101-107). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Swartz, J.D. (1997, October). Social abrasion: What does it mean to be present? Paper presented to the forty-seventh meeting of the Society for the Philosophy and History of Education, Dallas.
Yong, Y., & Wang, S. (1996). Faculty perceptions on a new approach to distance learning: Teletchnet. Journal of Instructional Delivery Systems, 10(2), 3-5.
Martha Daugherty is an associate professor in the Foundations and Secondary Education Department, School of Education, at Georgia College and State University, Milledgeville, Georgia. She received her doctorate in early childhood education at the University of Georgia. Previous research publications have included studies on private speech and creativity of young children and at-risk high school students and service learning. Barbara L. Funke is an associate professor in the Health, Physical Education, Recreation Department, School of Health Sciences, at Georgia College and State University, Milledgeville, Georgia. She obtained her doctorate in health education from Pennsylvania State University. Professional interests include technology applications as a teaching methodology, health promotion, and human sexuality.