Just a few years ago, “distance education” was a derisive term that conjured up images of paper mill diplomas. The early prophets of Internet-based distance education over-promised: learning via the Internet was never destined to be all things to all students.
However, the surprise is that educators who use Internet-based tools are now learning that distance education can, in fact, be more effective than traditional classroom instruction in select circumstances and for select purposes.
I have found in teaching criminal justice online that my students are more spontaneous than they might be in the classroom, and the online experience imposes certain responsibilities on them to think in a more structured, logical manner. They have better and more immediate research opportunities. I can offer counseling that doesn’t just go in one ear and out the other. Testing is more effective. And the costs of taking a class can be driven down significantly, which is obviously an issue of concern for many students.
Consider the conventional lecture hall milieu, with its class size often exceeding 100 students. The professor poses a topic-related question, hoping to spark a stimulating discussion. The number of hands raised in response is minimal, while the vast majority of students sit back, either letting others do the talking or drifting off into thoughts totally unrelated to the topic.
Contrast this with the online environment. Most well-managed courses, being of an interactive nature, require participation from all class members—no silent onlookers allowed. Some distance education courses require some or all discussions to be conducted in real-time using a specific chatroom.
The chatroom more closely duplicates a classroom discussion with students commenting spontaneously and usually in just a few short sentences. The disadvantage is that all participants must be at a computer simultaneously, which lessens the advantage of taking an online course. Students tend to select online courses because of difficulties in scheduling traditional courses, and because the 24/7 availability of online courses is a major advantage. By contrast, discussion board posting can be accomplished at convenient times and is available for later reading and responding by other class members.
Our discussion board is kept open for posting on a specific subject for one or two weeks. This allows students time to think about what they want to say, or edit their choice of words, before posting their comments to the discussion board for all members of the class to read. Initially, few postings reference commentary by others.
After the first topic, dialog between students begins to appear and often includes three or more members of the class. This process begins to duplicate the interaction in the lecture hall among speakers; contributions by the end of the semester will have included a large number of class members; this is in stark contrast to an on-campus classroom where discussion participation is invariably limited to just a few. In essence, a sense of more inclusive community is created in virtual reality.
The student who hesitates to speak up in class is now required to express an initial comment on the topic, and is able to do so in a non-threatening environment. Comments made on the discussion board sometimes disclose very private background information that is rarely, if ever, openly stated in the lecture hall. This is equally true in email messages, as compared with conversations held after class or even in my office.
There is an openness, apparently due to the sense of anonymity, accompanying virtual reality scenarios. On campus, unless a student is trying to justify a missed deadline or exam, personal information is rarely disclosed; it is revealed in the classroom even less often. Overall, personal information is more often forthcoming in upper-division online courses, with its required participation by all members.
Lack of participation appears endemic on-campus and is not restricted to larger classes. It also exists at the advanced level, with as few as 10 or as many as 40 department majors. In a class with 10 students, more than half contribute to a discussion only under duress— namely, when specifically asked to share their opinion with the class. All too often the reply is “I agree with what everyone else has been saying.” The online student must give a detailed response, quite often in agreement with the viewpoints of others.
Online students must support personal opinion with factual reference points. Similar or identical conclusions may be reached, yet totally different supportive examples are frequently tendered. Students are expected to do research prior to posting a discussion response. Research can be done in various ways. Students enrolled in an online course have access to the university library, with its large collection of digitized material and subscriptions to numerous databases. This allows students to search a topic in major newspapers as well as academic journals and either print out or download any material that is located. Alternatively, a student may choose to use an Internet search engine for topical material. The research is then used to support the opinion expressed.
This type of extended research is simply not practical as a requirement in an on-campus course; the direction of the discussion cannot be predetermined, and neither time nor resources are available to accommodate the hunt for supporting data. Supportive research is only one of many differences that exist between the two environments.
Visualize the typical on-campus course: as the professor opines, students write notes as quickly as possible, in a fruitless quest to capture every spoken word. The result is often a mere jumble of confusion, as critical points are invariably missed during the pseudo-dictation exercise. In other words, the student is so busy writing that thought and comprehension are absent—a classic example of hearing versus listening.
All too often, the student remains oblivious to this sad reality until the written notes are reviewed in preparation for an exam. The resulting competitive disadvantage is palpable, despite the fact that it has nothing to do with the student’s native intelligence or, indeed, work ethic. This hearing-versus-listening dichotomy materialized with brute force during an on-campus advising session.
I met with a student concerning courses required to complete the degree, and possible substitutions for the student’s consideration. The student took notes and I even printed out some of the information for her to take home. Nonetheless, that evening I received an e-mail, stating she wasn’t sure if I had said A or B. Students advised online have all the information and responses to questions in writing, simply because of the nature of e-mailed correspondence. Replies sent back and forth create a readily accessible paper trail, clarifying understanding of the choices involved.
Another clear advantage of the online teaching paradigm is the use of digital textbooks. I use digital textbooks in two of the courses I teach online; the digital equivalent of paper textbooks is not available for my other classes. Digital textbooks are reproductions of a traditional, printed textbook that appears on-screen via an Internet connection and allows professors to add comments on a paragraph-by-paragraph basis. The student clicks on an icon that appears to the left of the paragraph whenever there is an instructor-added comment. Additionally, the student can add his or her own notes to the paragraph.
The digital books I use are published by Atomic Dog Publishing Company. These digital versions are available to students for under $25 per book; a printed copy can be purchased for an additional $25 or so. At a cost of about $50, the student has access to the digital version and a printed text. The average price of conventional textbooks is $75 or more. Students often comment on the economic advantage of a digital textbook. Although the digital version is required, the printed copy is optional. A high percentage of students purchase both versions, according to surveys I take each semester. Survey results demonstrate that students are overwhelmingly enthusiastic about the availability of my annotations and rate this as a prime reason for wanting me to continue using digital textbooks.
These digital annotations are notes I’ve added, on a paragraph-by-paragraph basis, expanding concepts presented by the author. It should be noted that inserting comments paragraph-by-paragraph requires more time than most of us spend in lecture preparation if we have taught the class previously. However, the annotated copy can be rolled-over, or re-used in another semester, and would only require checking that annotated hyperlinks are working and that there have been no theoretical or case law changes that outdate something said earlier.
Many annotations duplicate the additional examples used previously in a lecture hall environment. Students read exactly what I intend to convey, unencumbered by the haste-makes-waste syndrome so prevalent with lecture hall note-taking. Additionally, annotations contain information that may form the basis of an exam question. Students report finding the ability to print a copy of all my notes helpful in chapter reviews. The publisher provides a viewable composite of all chapter notes as part of the end-of-chapter study guide.
The notes are not limited to examples or additional commentary; they often contain hyperlinks to Internet Web sites pertinent to the chapter under study. This integration of additional material, only a click away, provides the online student with another tool denied to the on-campus student.
There are additional advantages for my criminal justice majors. Criminal justice is a constantly changing field, and knowing about new court decisions released after the textbook went to print is important. Decisions by the Supreme Court of the United States as well as state appellate courts, may totally revise, for example, what is deemed constitutionally permissible or impermissible. My cyberspace students have up-to-the-minute information, which equates with accuracy. Annotations make note of new Court decisions, which are hyperlinked. Further, emails alert students to changes in the law materializing after a topic was covered during the course, yet prior to semester’s end.
Importantly, the e-mail is sent to the private account of each student in the course, with a subject header signifying its importance. Accordingly, such alerts are stored for safekeeping. Contrast this to a lecture in which a new case is discussed, but one or more students are absent that day. The absent student’s ability to capture that critical information is strictly dependent upon the notes or memory of the attending student who attempts to relay the information. The potential for confusion and inadvertently misleading information in such a scenario is obvious. And, on-campus students are not alone in being disadvantaged by paper textbooks.
Many professors read something in a newspaper or magazine that pertains to material we will be lecturing about in the coming weeks. When squirreling away the data, the initial intent is to discuss this material when the topic arises. But delay is the mother of forgetfulness. Given that reality, the class may never learn about the late-breaking development. By contrast, the digital text format readily accommodates the addition/revision of relevant annotations, as dictated by circumstance. Thus, the distance student enjoys a degree of accuracy unmatched in the world of the brick-and-mortar classroom, courtesy of do-it-quick digital text revisions, and/or e-mailed updates. The advantages continue, as witnessed by the enhanced potential opportunity for student recipients to share ideas about the new material by posting their commentary on the discussion board.
When you see how all these advantages of online learning come ogether in practice, the results can e most gratifying. During the fall 002 semester, by happenstance, I ound myself teaching two sections f the same introduction to criminal justice course—one on-campus, and he other, online. The fortuity of a st-minute assignment (two weeks efore classes began) to handle the n-campus section, coerced my deci-on to use the same material and xams in both sections.
I gave no consideration to com-arative research between the two ections until after I posted final rades. Consequently, while I cannot rovide precise gender, race, or age omparisons, or other controlled ariables so essential to a planned esearch project, I can share with ou the following anecdotal evi-ence. Coincidentally, the same umber of students was enrolled in ach section. The on-campus section
as comprised of predominately traditional” students: those coming to the university directly from high chool or from community college. hose who have been in the work-orce and are returning to obtain or omplete a degree are considered non-traditional” students.
By contrast, the typical advanced nline course in our department has he reverse balance. Our university ermits students to take the online introduction to criminal justice ourse to satisfy a 3-hour liberal arts ourse requisite. Therefore, a larger umber of traditional students— from other majors and colleges—are ound in my online introductory ourse. By contrast, traditional stu-ents in my upper division courses umber less than 10%. Overall, hen, the traditional/non-traditional ifference was not very large etween these two introductory sec-ons.
What was different involved the se of the digital version of the text-ook. The on-campus students were ot required to use the digital ver-on, although they were encouraged to do so. It is a requirement for the online students. It is important to note that on-campus students were continuously advised, during lectures, of related expansions and examples appearing in the digital text. Tests are given after each chapter, which equates to weekly testing.
Testing in the classroom created a time problem not encountered online, where tests are part of the weekly requirement. The on-cam-pus group met twice weekly, and the tests were always held on Thursday, which took a third of that day’s scheduled class time. Exam-taking limited time for discussions. Additionally, the online student gets immediate test results, whereas the on-campus student must wait until the next class period.
There was a perceived difference in the two classes, once they saw the test result. Students in the online environment quite frequently ask for clarification of why their chosen response was wrong, and many use this to help in preparation for future cumulative exams. Although offered the same opportunity, few on-cam-pus students took advantage of this; they were allowed to do so either in person or by e-mail to overcome a need to be somewhere else immediately after class ended. I also had weekly on-campus office hours. One can only speculate on how this difference affected final grades.
When the semester ended, comparison of the final grades in the two classes astounded me: 80% of the online students earned an A or B, in contrast to 30% of the on-campus class earning the same high grade. Most on-campus students earned a C. A mere 1% of online students either failed the course or received a D, whereas 9% of the on-campus group did. Recall, the material was identical! How to explain the dramatic grade differences?
In my opinion, the digital text contributed to the higher success rate for the online student. The publisher provides a list of students who have registered access to the digital text. New copies of the hardcover edition include an access code; students who have purchased used copies can purchase access for approximately $20. After noting the difference in grades between the two sections, I looked at the names of on-campus students who had registered access to the course: these students nearly all achieved an A or a B. Unable to find any other rational variable to account for the grade differences, I concluded that using a digital text gave students a decided advantage in terms of understanding and the ability to do critical thinking and analysis.
There is no way of knowing what type of Internet access is available to the virtual student, and the question of download time is often mentioned whenever the subject of digital texts is raised. The publisher of the book I use utilizes a format that accommodates students with various types of access. The text is broken into small segments and the time needed for viewing is tolerable, even using a dial-up connection. This enables all students, regardless of connectivity method, to enjoy easy access to material. Some students prefer not to read a good deal of information at the computer; they can print out sections they wish to read off-screen. Alternatively, with the optional printed text, they may choose to print the annotations and consult them as they read the printed text.
Students are encouraged to purchase the printed version in addition to the digital one so that downed servers or lack of computer access does not create high stress and anxiety. Unfortunately, computer problems shall always remain part of online education.
In summary, although the online experience might not be appropriate for certain types of education and some subject areas, when it is suitable, using a digital textbook appears to provide online students with advantages that outweigh the face-to-face contact in an on-campus class. Online instruction is more time-intensive than on-campus classes because of the interaction between faculty and student; the amount of e-mail generated is often underestimated by those who have never taught a virtual class.
Information imparted during lectures is available in annotations. Participation by all members of the class allows multiple viewpoints to be easily considered and evaluated. Neither body language, nor looks from others, causes a student to refrain from giving an honest response. The normally reticent and shy student’s comments are expressed and given the same consideration as that of any other class member. Because virtual students are located worldwide and work in a wide variety of fields, real-world applications and information is not limited to the theoretical but shared in postings to the discussion board. The age of distance learning in higher education has arrived, and the digital textbook helps maximize its value.
About the author
