Article Review
Becky Earll
Article title and source:
Leonard, J. & Guha, S. (2001). Education at the crossroads: Online teaching and students’
perspectives on distance learning. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34(1), 5157. Retrieved February 20, 2006, from ProQuest Education Journals database. (Document ID:
101616762).
Background or introduction:
In their research study, Leonardo and Guha were interested in knowing how well on-line
courses were perceived by pre-service teachers enrolled at an urban university. It was clear to
them that as more online courses were being offered across the country, colleges were becoming
more competitive with one another. Do they work however? The authors wanted to do research
on these courses by interviewing those pre-service teachers receiving both traditional and online
instruction to determine how online classes were perceived in motivating them to learn. A
$7,500 grant was given to Leonard and Guha, both of whom have Web design experience, to
develop online courses. These courses were in early childhood education and mathematics
education. A pilot study was conducted with a control group of students taking the traditional
courses, while a formal study looked closely at those students taking the same online courses.
Research questions:
1. What are students’ beliefs and perceptions about taking online courses?
2. How do students who have taken online courses perceive the value of these courses?
Literature review:
In preparing for and analyzing their study, Leonardo and Guha looked at the following
publications: Tech Trends, the National Association for the Education of Young Children,
Journal of Research on Computing in Education.
Method:
Students between the ages of 20-45 were used in both the pilot and formal studies. Of
these students, 37 were female and 7 were male and there were both undergraduate and graduate
students. All were enrolled in one or both of the courses offered by Leonard and Guha.
Participation was voluntary. Out of 44 students, 24 volunteered to participate in the pilot study
with the traditional teaching of the class. As for the formal study, 20 students, all living off
campus, volunteered to participate in the online class.
Both studies used survey instruments to collect information about students’ perceptions
about taking online courses. The traditional students answered questions as if they were to take
an online class, and the online students answered questions regarding their views prior to, during,
and after taking an online course. At the end of the semester, questionnaires were distributed.
These questionnaires consisted of 10 items—a 5-point Likert scale (1=”strongly disagree” to
5=”strongly agree”) was used to rank the responses. Traditional students took this survey in the
classroom, while online students took the survey online. Leonard and Guha then used
quantitative research methods to analyze the students’ responses.
Findings:
Included in the questionnaire were questions regarding the availability of online courses,
whether or not online courses should be offered to students in education, the effectiveness of an
online education course, whether or not students would take an online education course, the
perception of online communication between students and professors, students’ perceptions of
professors in general, and whether or not students would learn less in an online class. Finally,
the statement “I believe that chat rooms cannot replace the value of a good classroom
discussion” was to be agreed or disagreed with. After surveying the traditional class, the majority
of the students would like to see online courses made available; however, they were split about
whether or not they would take an on-line class. Their main concern was the effectiveness of the
course in its ability to prepare students to teach. Convenience was the major motivational factor
for taking an online course.
Students in the online course were much more positive in their responses. They
perceived the online courses as more effective in preparing them to teach. All the students had a
high level of comfort using the technology, and they did not have difficulty accessing their
courses. Ninety percent of the students stated that they received enough instruction through the
online course. Most enjoyed the experience even though sixty percent found that taking an
online course was more difficult than taking a traditional course. Seventy-five percent were
satisfied and found that the online courses met their expectation. Fifty percent stated that there
was more class interaction. Sixty percent felt that compared to a traditional course, the online
course was a better learning opportunity. Finally, the program evaluation was promising: on a
5.0 scale, ED 107 received a 4.14 and MTH ED 462 received a 4.09.
Article conclusion:
Distance learning has the potential to improve learning, and technology integration in the
classroom needs to occur more frequently. Pre-service teachers need to familiarize themselves
with technology in order to improve student learning. After participating in an online course, the
majority of the students in this study have shown how they perceive these courses to be exciting,
effective learning experiences that are able to meet their academic needs as well as improve their
technological skills.
Good points of article:
Background information, including contact information, is given on the authors Leonard and
Guha.
The research questions were very clearly stated; the whole study was well-organized.
The authors included their charts showing all the data that they collected.
An analysis of each individual response is given to better summarize the data.
Detailed descriptions of the online courses are included in an appendix.
A clear implication is stated as to why the authors carried out their research: Education
professors must address a common student perception that online courses are not as effective in
preparing pre-service to teach.
Poor points of article:
I really felt that this is one of the best-written research articles I have read. I would have
liked to have known the online students’ perceptions of online courses prior to taking the online
courses themselves, but that may be included in the appendix (online link that I couldn’t access
through my print-out!).
Another concern I do have is the uncontrollable variables that those students taking the
online courses each faced. The experiences could have been made better or worse depending on
their access to a computer, their environment (loud, quiet, distracting, etc.), their computer skills,
their own motivation and responsibility for their learning, etc. All or any of these could have
helped determine the perception that each had of their online course.