Internet and Higher Education 7 (2004) 59–70Improving online.docx

Internet and Higher Education 7 (2004) 59–70
Improving online learning: Student perceptions of useful
and challenging characteristics
Liyan Song*, Ernise S. Singleton, Janette R. Hill, Myung Hwa
Koh
University of Georgia, 604 Aderhold Hall, Athens, GA 30602,
USA
Received 4 September 2003; received in revised form 3
November 2003; accepted 4 November 2003
Abstract
Online courses and programs continue to grow in higher
education settings. Students are increasingly
demanding online access, and universities and colleges are
working to meet the demands. Yet many questions
remain re: the viability and veracity of online learning,
particularly from the learner perspective. The purpose of
this study was to gain insights into learners’ perceptions of
online learning. Seventy-six (76) graduate students
were surveyed to identify helpful components and perceived
challenges based on their online learning experiences.
Results of the study indicated that most learners agreed that
course design, learner motivation, time management,

and comfortableness with online technologies impact the
success of an online learning experience. Participants
indicated that technical problems, a perceived lack of sense of
community, time constraints, and the difficulty in
understanding the objectives of the online courses as
challenges. Suggestions for addressing the challenges are
provided.
D 2004 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Student perceptions; Online learning; Implication
strategies
1. Introduction
What makes a learner successful in an online environment?
What creates barriers or challenges?
Answers to these questions, among others, gain increasing
importance as Internet technologies become
more readily available and accessible, in formal and informal
contexts (Hofmann, 2002). By the year
1997, there were more than 762 institutions in the United States
alone that offered courses at a distance
(Gubernick and Ebeling, 1997, as cited in Cereijo, Young, &
Wilhelm, 1999). The Making the Virtual
1096-7516/$ - see front matter D 2004 Elsevier Inc. All rights
reserved.

doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2003.11.003
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +1-706-542-3810; fax: +1-706-
542-4032.
E-mail address: [email protected] (L. Song).
L. Song et al. / Internet and Higher Education 7 (2004) 59–7060
Classroom a Reality (MVCR) online program at the University
of Illinois alone had admitted over
1000 individuals from various states and foreign countries by
December 2002 (Santovec, 2003). Some
of the top institutions in the United States (e.g., MIT, Indiana
University, Pennsylvania State
University) are offering entire degree programs on line, ranging
from business to education, criminal
justice to nursing.
In addition to programs and courses, most universities now
require access to basic course information
on line (Leonard & Guha, 2001). This includes information such
as the syllabus, resource lists, and
office hours for the instructor. At University of California at
Los Angeles (UCLA), for example, all arts
and science courses are required to have course Web sites
(Noble, 1998). Even when it is not required,

educators are increasingly developing an online presence for
their courses via the Internet (Brown,
Kirkpatrick, & Wrisley, 2003).
The increasing online access to programs, courses, and course
information is exciting. Initial research
exploring the potential of online learning has provided some
overall insights (e.g., Cereijo et al., 1999;
Conrad, 2002; Hartley & Bendixen, 2001; Hill, 2002). For
example, some sources indicate that online
learning enables institutions and/or instructors to reach new
learners at a distance, increases convenience,
and expands educational opportunities (Bourne, McMaster,
Rieger, & Campbell, 1997; Hara & Kling,
1999, 2001; Hill, 2002; Hofmann, 2002; Owston, 1997; Rourke,
2001; Schrum, 2000).
Yet, the movement toward online learning is not grounded in
compelling empirical evidence that it is
effective and/or beneficial for learning (Hannafin, Hill, Oliver,
Glazer, & Sharma, 2003). Many of the
studies in online learning remain rather ‘‘anecdotal’’ (Hara &
Kling, 1999), coming from the point of
view of the faculty member teaching the course or the
instructional technologist designing and/or
developing the course (Berge, 1997; Bourne et al., 1997). While

the overall perspectives and faculty-
based studies are important for understanding the potential
value of online learning, few studies have
detailed the learners’ perspectives of online learning (Hara &
Kling, 1999). There is a need for
continuing research studies related to specific areas (e.g.,
pedagogical strategies to promote learners’
online learning experience, the impact of learner characteristics
on learner’s Web-based learning
experience), as well as overall perceptions (Cereijo et al., 1999;
Hara & Kling, 1999, 2001; Hartley
& Bendixen, 2001). The constant growth of the Web influences
and changes how online courses are
designed and implemented. This, in turn, may also change the
students’ perceptions of their online
experience. Continued studies of learners’ perspectives of
online learning environments are needed in
order to build more effective Web-based instruction that can
optimize the learning experience within this
ever-changing landscape.
The purpose of this paper is to describe a study exploring the
learners’ perspectives of online learning.
Specifically, the researchers sought to explore learners’
perceptions of useful and challenging

components in learning on line. The discussion of the study
begins with a review of the literature
related to online learning. Next, the background of the research
followed by the results of the study is
described. Finally, implications and suggestions for further
research are presented.
2. Literature review
The literature related to online learning has expanded
considerably in the last 5 years. The review that
follows focuses on literature related to the learner’s experience,
particularly the learners’ perspectives of
strengths and weaknesses related to online learning.
2.1. Students’ perceived strengths of online learning
A few studies have explored learners’ perspectives of online
learning particularly in terms of
perceived strengths and weaknesses. In a qualitative study,
Petrides (2002) interviewed learners to
obtain their perspectives on Web-based learning. The research
context was a one-semester regularly
scheduled class in a higher education setting using Web-based
technology (LearningSpace) as a
supplement. When interviewed, some participants indicated that

they tended to think more deeply
about the subject areas when responding in writing as compared
to giving verbal responses. They
explained that they were able to continually reflect upon each
other’s reflections because of the public
and permanent display of the discussion postings on the Web.
As stated by one participant: ‘‘There is
something that forces you to think more deeply about subject
areas when you have to respond in
writing’’ (Petrides, 2002, p. 72). Another participant reiterated
this sentiment, indicating that the online
technology allowed more reflection than what might occur for
some individuals in face-to-face
classroom discussions.
In Vonderwell’s (2003) study, the author interviewed 22
students in regards to their perceptions of
their asynchronous online learning experiences. Some
participants expressed that the asynchronous
environment allowed them to write carefully about their ideas.
For example, one participant stated: ‘‘the
discussion questions were not just for writing the answers; they
required reflection’’ (p. 86).
Other research studies reported similar findings to those of
Petrides’ (2002) and Vonderwell’s (2003),

reporting participants’ perspectives that thoughtful and
responsible comments are fostered by asynchro-
nous online technologies. Chizmar and Walbert (1999) found
that the public display of online
discussions made learners more careful in posting their
comments. Participants indicated there were
several reasons for the careful posting, with one of the primary
factors being that they knew it was there
for the entire class, and indeed the world, to read (Chizmar &
Walbert, 1999).
Flexibility is another reported strength of online learning
(Petrides, 2002; Schrum, 2002). Petrides
(2002) stated that participants reported it was easier to work in
collaborative groups in an online course
without rearranging everyone’s schedule as one might do in a
traditional face-to-face course. In addition
to flexibility with time, choices related to the learning
experience were also reported as positive.
Participants in the Chizmar and Walbert (1999) study indicated
that the ability to freely pick and choose
from the menu of diverse learning experiences enabled them to
find the approaches that best fit the way
they learn.

Convenience is another advantage identified in the online
learning literature. For example, in
Poole’s (2000) study of student participation in a discussion-
oriented online course, the results
indicated that students participated in online discussions at
times most convenient to them, such as on
Saturdays. Poole also found that students mostly accessed
course materials from their home
computers, the place most convenient to them. Murphy and
Collins (1997) found similar results in
their study of communication conventions in instructional
electronic chats. Participants indicated they
read and responded to comments in online discussions at times
convenient to them (e.g., early
morning, late evening).
2.2. Students’ perceived weaknesses of online learning
Several weaknesses related to online learning were also
described in the literature. Delay in responses
is one reported weakness. In Petrides’ (2002) study, some
participants reported they felt a lack of
61

immediacy in responses in the online context in comparison to
what could typically occur in a structured
face-to-face class discussion. This appears to be especially
obvious in asynchronous online discussions
when students have to wait for others to read and respond back
to their bulletin board postings or e-mail
messages. Participants in Hara and Kling’s (1999) qualitative
case study of a Web-based distance
education course at a major U.S. university also reported lack of
immediacy in getting responses back
from the instructor, and as a result they felt frustrated. Recent
studies indicate similar results. For
example, in Vonderwell’s (2003) study, one reported
disadvantage of an online course was the delay of
immediate feedback from the instructor. One participant in the
study stated that when he emailed a
question to the instructor, ‘‘it might take hours, maybe a day or
so before you get an answer back for the
question’’ (Vonderwell, 2003, p. 84). Perceived level of
expertise is another weakness identified in
online learning studies. Participants in Petrides’ (2002) study
reported skepticism of their peers’
supposed expertise. In contrast, the participants indicated they
felt comfortable relying on the instructor’s

expertise.
Lack of a sense of community and/or feelings of isolation were
other challenges learners reported in
their online learning experiences. Vonderwell (2003) reported
that online learning participants indicated
a lack of connection with the instructor, especially ‘‘one-on-
one’’ relationship with the instructor. As
stated by one participant in the study, ‘‘I still feel like I know a
little bit about my instructor, but not the
same way that I would if I was in a class. I don’t know much
about her personality at all’’ (p. 83). Other
studies found similar results. For example, Woods’ (2002)
reported that online learners reported feeling
isolated from faculty as well as other learners in the online
courses they had taken.
3. Research design
The purpose of this study was to investigate the components of
the online learning environments that
learners recognize as helpful in the learning process and those
that learners identify as challenging. Two
primary research questions guided this research:
1. What are the components of online learning environments
that learners recognize as helpful in the

learning process?
2. What are the components of online learning environments
that learners identify as challenging?
3.1. Participants
The study participants were graduate students at a large
research university in the South. All
participants in the study have taken at least one course that is
primarily online (i.e., there may be some
face-to-face interactions, particularly at the beginning and end
of the term). Seventy-six learners
participated in the survey and 14 participants agreed to
participate in a follow-up interview. Fifty-four
(54–71%) of the participants had taken more than one online
course and 22 (22–29%) of the
participants were first-time online learners. Seventy-one of the
participants were aged from 20 to 50
and the remaining five participants were over 50 years old.
There were 67 (88%) females and 9 (12%)
males (see the summary in Table 1).
All learners in the study were contacted face to face by the
researchers and asked to voluntarily
participate in this study. Participants signed an informed
consent form when the questionnaire was

Table 1
Demographics
Number of learners (N=76) Percent
Gender
Male 9 12
Female 67 88
Age
20–29 26 34
30–39 21 27
40–49 24 32
Over 50 5 7
Area
Education 72 95
Business 3 4
Social sciences 1 1
Status
Full time employee/part time learner 54 71

Full time learner with assistantship 2 1
Full time learner without assistantship 10 12
Part time learner/part time employee 6 9
Part time learner 2 4
On-line course experience
More than one course online 54 71
First time on-line learners 22 29
63
distributed. The questionnaire also asked learners to provide
additional contact information if they were
willing to participate in an interview. Fourteen participants
volunteered to participate in the follow-up
interview. The researchers interviewed participants on an
individual basis to gather more in-depth
information.
3.2. Assumption and limitations
Assumptions associated with this research included that all
learners who volunteered to participate
would have completed at least one course primarily on line (i.e.,
13 out of 16 sessions in a term meeting
online). It was also assumed that each participant would be

honest in recording a response. Further
assumptions were that the participants were representative of
learners at the institution where the
research was conducted and that they were generally
representative of the learner population involved in
an online learning environment at the postsecondary level.
There were a few limitations associated with the research. One
limitation was that the participants
were determined by using purposeful sampling, with a focus on
graduate students in instructional
technology. Generalizability should not be expected or assumed.
Another limitation relates to the
validity and reliability of the survey. While the survey is based
on previous research and was tested prior
to wide distribution, formal validity and reliability tests were
not performed.
3.3. Data collection
The study adopted mixed research methodology using both
quantitative (predominately closed
response questionnaire) and qualitative (interview) data
collection methods. By using multiple sources
for data collection, the researchers were able to use different

data sources to validate and crosscheck
findings (Patton, 1990).
The questionnaire, completed around midterm in the 2002 fall
semester, was comprised of a set
of 20 questions including learner characteristics (e.g.,
demographics, enrollment status, the place
they usually accessed the Internet for the online course),
perceived challenges, and helpful
components in their online experiences. Multiple researchers
designed the questionnaire items based
on insights gained from review of the literature individually and
then compared the questionnaire
in a group in order to validate the initial research questions. The
survey was also tested on a small
sample of learners. Revisions were made based on the feedback
from the sample prior to full
implementation.
The researchers interviewed 9 of the 14 participants who
volunteered to participate in a follow-up
interview (5 were not interviewed due to scheduling conflicts).
Interviews were conducted to obtain
more in-depth information in regard to learner perceptions of
online learning and to solicit any advice

they may have for new online learners and online instructors
(see Appendix A for the interview protocol
list of questions).
To ensure credibility and trustworthiness of the interview
responses, two researchers conducted the
interviews. Data from the interviews were used to substantiate
and extend results from the questionnaire.
The data collection process ended in the 2003 spring semester.
3.4. Data analysis
Analysis of the data focused on the two areas addressed in the
research questions: learners’ perceived
helpful components in online learning and learners’ perceived
challenges in online learning. Organi-
zation and analysis of the questionnaire data were completed by
using SPSS. The entire data set was
entered into the program. Subsequent analysis of the data
occurred by identification of specific survey
questions and further analysis in SPSS.
Qualitative data analysis consisted of coding the interview
transcripts. Seven indicators from the
interview protocol were identified to assist with coding.
Multiple researchers coded the interview
transcripts. Coding was first completed individually. The

researchers then compared the coding in a
group in order to reconcile differences and identify themes in
the interviews.
Members of the research group analyzed the quantitative and
qualitative data to identify overall
themes and patterns. Themes and patterns were then compiled
according to the research questions.
Results from the analysis are discussed in the following
sections.
4. Results
Results indicate several trends in overall components perceived
as useful and challenges that confront
learners in online learning contexts. The overall research
questions have been used to organize the
presentation of the data.
4.1. What makes a learner successful in an online environment?
Results of the study indicate that the majority of the
participants identify the following components as
helpful in their online learning: design of the course, comfort
with online technologies, and time
management (for a summary of the questionnaire data, see Table

2).
Participants who were equally satisfied with online learning as
compared to traditional classroom
learning felt that design of the course (82%), comfort with
online technologies (82%), and time
management (80%) were influencing factors in the success of an
online course. Participants who were
more satisfied with online learning felt that design of the course
(87%) made for a successful online
learning environment. Many of the participants also reported
that comfort with online technology (75%),
motivation of the learner (62%), and time management of the
learner (62%) impacted their success of
online learning.
The majority of the participants who were less satisfied with
online learning as compared to traditional
classroom learning also agreed that design of the course (89%),
motivation of the learner (82%), and
comfort with online technologies (82%) made for a successful
course. Across all areas of satisfaction, it
appears that the design of the course is the most important
factor (83%), followed by being comfortable
with the technology (76%). Motivation (74%) and time
management (71%) were ranked third and fourth in

terms of level of importance in what makes a learner successful
in an online course.
Additional strengths and helpful factors were identified in the
interviews. Convenience was one of the
strengths of online learning indicated in the interview data.
Participants reported that it was helpful not to
have to travel to the campus (which was up to a 60-minute drive
for some). The ability to complete
assignments and tasks at anytime was another reported strength.
Although most of the participants liked the flexibility of
completing tasks at anytime in the
asynchronous courses, some participants had experienced
synchronous online courses as well. Some
participants indicated that meeting at a specific time on line
each week also had strengths. By meeting
each week at a set time, the participants indicated they were
able to form connections with the instructor
and other classmates. Participants indicated that the connections
formed among the learners and the
instructor were important in that they assisted with the
formation of a community within the online
learning environment.
Participants were also asked to comment on the perceived

usefulness of specific technologies used in
their online courses. Tools such as chat, e-mail, and bulletin
boards were the primary forms of
communication in the online courses taken by the interviewees.
Reviews of the helpfulness of the
65
Table 2
Components that create successful on-line learning
environments
Level of satisfaction Components
More satisfied with on-line learning Design of course (87%),
comfort with on-line technology (75%),
motivation, and time management (62%)
Equally satisfied with on-line learning
and face-to-face learning
Design of course (82%), comfort with on-line technology
(82%),
time management (80%), and motivation (77%)
Less satisfied with on-line learning Design of course (89%),
comfort with on-line technology (82%),
motivation (82%), and time management (75%)

Overall Design of course (83%), comfort with on-line
technology (78%),
motivation (76%), and time management (75%)
technologies were mixed by interview participants. Betsy felt
that chat ‘‘was pretty dynamic and it was
good.’’ She suggested that chat was good even though the
conversation may have moved on, stating, ‘‘I
didn’t feel it was a handicap because invariably, somebody
would read what I wrote. Even though it was
a little lag, they would respond to my thoughts. So I didn’t feel
that was too big a problem.’’ On the other
hand, Eliza felt the exact opposite about the chat room. She
stated,
It takes a while to think about it and it takes a while to type it.
By that time the moment had passed
and it was onto something else. So that was really frustrating
about it. . .I think you need a
moderator. . .you were kind of having all the parts of the
conversation at the same time. So it was
difficult. . .the chat screen was pretty short, so the stuff said
before would disappear on the top. You
can’t remember what you are responding to. It is hard to hold in
your head so much information. . .I
think it is harder to remember all the points just it does go by so
quickly.

Eliza preferred communicating through the bulletin board
feature. She felt it was quite interesting to
get people talking about a particular topic and seeing their
thoughts. The ability to post, read, and
respond to the thoughts of others at any given time was plus for
Eliza. While Betsy was positive about
the chat, she also felt that the bulletin board was more useful
that chatting. It had more impact and
required more involvement. Jennifer liked the bulletin board
because she was able to get feedback about
an idea:
. . .when you post online you have an idea and you ask for
people’s feedback. And then that was really
more of where you could see the little trail. Of people replying
and you would reply back and have
sort of a one-on-one conversation with that person.
Overall, participants indicated that participation in the bulletin
board should be driven by the
instructor in order to facilitate communication and the building
of a community.
4.2. What creates barriers or challenges?
Many participants in this research study reported that lack of
community, difficulty understanding

instructional goals, and technical problems were challenges in
their online learning experiences (for a
summary from the questionnaire data, see Table 3).
Participants who were less satisfied with online learning as
compared to traditional classroom learning
felt that a lack of community (71%) within the online
environment was a challenge in online courses.
Sixty percent of the participants reported having difficulty
understanding the goals/objectives of the
course and fifty percent indicated technical problems as a
barrier.
The concern over a lack of community was also expressed in the
interviews. Interview participants
indicated that they felt the formation of a community in an
online course could occur if the instructor
facilitated this notion. Several participants indicated that having
a face-to-face meeting at the beginning
of the course would encourage this process. Paula said, ‘‘if you
can get face-to-face [they] are good. . .a
kick-off one [meeting] I think is very helpful. . .it puts faces to
people.’’ Will also commented on the
value of an initial face-to-face meeting. He commented that in
one of his online courses, the instructor
took a picture of each of the learners and posted them online.
This appears to have assisted with the

community formation. As stated by Will,
Table 3
Components that create barriers in on-line learning
environments
Level of satisfaction Components
More satisfied with on-line learning Technical problem (75%)
Equally satisfied with on-line learning
and face-to-face learning
Technical problem (54%)
Less satisfied with on-line learning Lack of community (71%),
difficult the goals/
objectives (60%), and technical problem (50%)
Overall Technical problem (58%) and lack of community (50%)
67
. . .the first night of class, we were actually here and we had
photo taken. Dr. James set up a Web page
with everybody’s photo in it. Actually it looks like a mug shot
because you had to hold your name.
But everybody had a picture with their name. It took me a while
to associate who is who. I click back

to that page, and see, oh yeah that is who it is.
The biggest challenge reported by study participants were
technical problems (58%). Technical
problems were a challenge to participants who were more
satisfied with online learning (75%) and those
that were equally satisfied with online learning (54%) as
compared to traditional classroom learning.
The concern over technical problems was also reflected across
all of the interviews. Will commented
on the technical problems, stating that learners need to ‘‘be
prepared that there are times when you have
technical difficulties and you can’t really do anything about
that.’’ Technical problems were more
significant for some participants than others. Carmen felt that
the numerous technological problems in
her online course took up too much of the class she had in one
semester. She stated that there were ‘‘so
many technical things. . .that [it] seemed to take up the whole
focus [of the course].’’
5. Discussion
This study focused on the learners’ perceptions of helpful
components and challenges in online
learning environments. The components participants identified
as helpful in this study are similar to what

has been identified in previous research. Instructional design
was one of the primary factors identified as
helpful for online learning. Instructional designers have devoted
decades of research and development to
create models and processes to assist with the design and
creation of instruction (e.g., Dick, Carey, &
Carey, 2000; Smith and Ragan, 2000). It is not overly surprising
that this element would rank in the top
three, regardless of the mode of delivery. As stated by Dempsey
and Van Eck (2002), it takes a good
design to make good online instruction. There exist several
models upon which to base the designs of
effective online environments. The challenge that remains is
one of examining the current models and
processes that exist for face-to-face instruction and see how
well they work for online instruction (and/or
how they might be adapted).
Time management was another factor identified as useful for
online learning. This study reinforces the
importance of time management strategies for assisting with the
online learning process. Hill’s (2002)
research indicates that implementing strategies such as working
at the same time and in the same space
can have an impact on the success of the online learning

process. She also suggests that a regular
schedule be established for engaging in the dialogue that occurs
in an online context. According to Hill,
by putting into place basic time management strategies, learners
can improve their overall online
learning experience.
Other issues that were highlighted as useful in this study related
to technology experience and comfort
level. In this study, experience with the technology influenced
the participants’ perspectives of how
useful the technologies were for online learning. Concerns
associated with comfort in using the
technologies are not insignificant. Researchers in the area of
technology integration have long understood
this to be a key element in the successful use of technology for
learning (e.g., Hooper & Rieber, 1995).
Indeed, previous research related to Web-based learning has
also indicated the importance of this factor
(e.g., Hill, 2002). How to best facilitate the building of skills
and comfort remains a challenge for
facilitators and learners.

Several components were identified as challenging for online
learning. Lack of community is not a
new criticism voiced by learners, nor is it a new challenge in
the literature. Research studies have shown
the importance of sense of community in students’ learning
experiences. For example, in Rovai’s (2002)
study, the author studied 314 students who were enrolled in 26
graduate education and leadership online
courses taught via Blackboard.com e-learning system. The
results of the study indicated a significant
relationship between students’ perceived sense of community
and perceived cognitive learning. The
stronger the online learners’ sense of community, the less
isolated they felt. Given that sense of
community continues to be an issue indicated as important in
this study, such warrants further
exploration as well as the creation of processes to enable the
connections to occur.
The issues associated with lack of understanding goals and
objectives link back to what learners stated
as helpful: good instructional design. Data from this study
indicate that it is important to have goals and/
or objectives clearly stated so that learners will have a better
understanding of what is expected. Again,

there are many models and processes that can be used to assist
with the creation of goals and objectives,
particularly as they link into a larger course infrastructure
(Dick, Carey, & Carey, 1999). What also
appears to be important is the ability to clarify perceptions of
goals and objectives. Providing
mechanisms where learners can ask questions to improve their
understanding of expectations can assist
with this effort.
Technical problems have long created challenges with the use of
technology for learning. Indeed, it is
important to minimize the issues as much as possible from the
beginning of the learning experience. This
can be accomplished in a variety of ways, including providing
overviews of the tools used for the course
and/or hands-on workshops with the technology that will be
used in the online learning experience. It is
also equally important to help learners understand that problems
are going to occur—and most likely at
the most inconvenient time (Hill, 2002). Facilitators can help
ease the stress by letting learners know at
the beginning of the course that they understand problems will
occur. Learners can help ease their own
stress by recognizing that problems can occur and making back-

up plans and back-up copies to help
facilitate their work.
In addition to discussing specific challenges and useful
components, interviewees provided several
suggestions for faculty members teaching online courses and for
prospective online learners. A factor
that emerged for both faculty and learners was organization.
Organization on the part of the instructor
should include establishing goals from the beginning of the
course, providing explicit directions,
providing examples of the end products, and establishing
deadlines for deliverables. Students should
also work to maintain organization by setting a schedule and
making the course Web site a part of their
daily activities. Frances states, ‘‘I would say make it a daily
thing. . .if you think of a time that works for
you, then choose that.’’ That point was reiterated several times
through the various interviews.
69
6. Conclusion
The current study offers several implications for practice and
research. First, there is a need for

effective instructional design for online courses. The design
should focus not only on the technological
aspects of the course, but also on the goals, objectives, and
expectations for the learners. Continuing to
explore design models that are most effective for online
learning will also help facilitate this activity.
Second, there is a need to work with learners to assist them in
the development of time management
strategies. Online courses are dynamic on multiple levels:
information is received in a variety of formats
and at different times. When learners are accustomed to
learning in more static, real-time contexts, this
can create significant time management issues. Assisting
learners in establishing strategies for managing
their time may prove to be useful.
Finally, there is a need to work with learners to assist them with
establishing community or feelings of
connection in online contexts. Integrating strategies for
community building into the design of the course
may assist with this effort. Continued research related to
community building strategies in a variety of
contexts is also needed to enable the advancement of best
practices in the dynamic context of the Web.
The growth of the Internet and online learning will continue,

and as indicated in this study, it will
come with challenges. Individuals engaged in an online course
may have different qualities for a
successful online environment or elements that are challenging.
Each experience will be unique to the
individual. As educators and students become more comfortable
and adept at communicating and
learning at a distance, it will remain imperative that the best
practices associated with these learning
environments continue to be explored.
Appendix A. Interview protocol
1. Tell us about an online course you have taken. . .
2. What do you think are the strengths and weaknesses of online
courses?
3. We would like for you to think about those strengths and
weaknesses. . .and then think about face-to-
face courses you have taken. What do you miss about face-to-
face courses when you are in an online
course? What do you miss about an online course when you are
in a face-to-face course?
4. One of the issues raised in the surveys related to the notion
of community or feeling like you have
connections with others when you are in class together. First, do
you think that this is an important
aspect in a class? Can you talk to us about your sense of

connections with others in a face-to-face
course versus an online course?
5. You have experience with taking courses online. What
suggestions would you give to a student who
is taking an online course for the first time? What suggestions
would you give to faculty teaching
online courses?
References
Berge, Z. (1997, May–June). Characteristics of online teaching
in post-secondary, formal education. Educational Technology,
35–47.
Bourne, J.R., McMaster, E., Rieger, J., & Campbell, J.O.
(1997). Paradigms for online learning: A case study in the
design and
implementation of an asynchronous learning networks (ALAN)
course. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 1(2).
Retrieved April 15, 2002, from
http://www.aln.org/publications/jaln/v1n2/index.asp
http:www.aln.orgpublicationsjalnv1n2index.asp
Brown, S.T., Kirkpatrick, M.K., & Wrisley, C.D. (2003).
Evaluative parameters of a Web-based nursing leadership course
from

learners’ perspectives. Journal of Nursing Education, 42(3),
134–147.
Cereijo, M.V.P., Young, J., & Wilhelm, R.W. (1999). Factors
facilitating learner participation in asynchronous Web-based
courses.
Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 18(1), 32–39.
Chizmar, J.F., & Walbert, M.S. (1999). Web-based learning
environments guided by principles of good teaching practice.
Journal of Economic Education, 248–264.
Conrad, D.L. (2002). Engagement, excitement, anxiety, and
fear: Learners’ experiences of starting an online course.
American
Journal of Distance Education, 16(4), 205–226.
Dempsey, J.V., & Van Eck, R.N.V. (2002). Instructional design
on-line: Evolving expectations. In R.A. Reiser, & J.V. Dempsey
(Eds.), Trends and issues in instructional design and technology
(pp. 281–294). New Jersey: Pearson Education.
Dick, W., Carey, L., & Carey, J.O. (1999). The systematic
design of instruction. New York: Addison-Wesley Educational
Publishers Inc.
Dick, W., Carey, L., & Carey, J.O. (2000). The systematic
design of instruction (5th ed.). New York: HarperCollins.
Hannafin, M.J., Hill, J.R., Oliver, K., Glazer, E., & Sharma, P.
(2003). Cognitive and learning factors in Web-based distance

learning environments. In M.G. Moore, & W.G. Anderson
(Eds.), Handbook of distance education (pp. 245–260). Mah-
wah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Hara, N., & Kling, R. (1999). Students’ frustrations with a web-
based distance education course. First Monday, 4(12).
http://www.firstmonday.dk/issues/issue4_12/index.html
Hara, N., & Kling, R. (2001). Student distress in Web-based
distance education. EDUCAUSE Quarterly, 3.
Hartley, K., & Bendixen, L.D. (2001). Educational research in
the Internet age: Examining the role of individual
characteristics.
Educational Researcher, 30(9), 22–26.
Hill, J.R. (2002). Overcoming obstacles and creating
connections: Community building in Web-based learning
environments.
Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 14(1), 67–86.
Hofmann, D.W. (2002). Internet-based distance learning in
higher education. Tech Directions, 62(1), 28–32.
Hooper, S., & Rieber, L.P. (1995). Teaching with technology. In
A.C. Orstein (Ed.), Teaching: Theory into practice (pp.
154–170). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Leonard, J., & Guha, S. (2001). Education at the crossroads:

Online teaching and learners’ perspectives on distance learning.
Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34(1), 51–57.
Murphy, K.L., & Collins, M.P. (1997). Communication
conventions in instructional electronic chats. First Monday,
2(11).
http://www.firstmonday.dk/issues/issue2_11/index.html
Noble, D.F. (1998). Digital diploma mills: The automation of
higher education. First Monday, 3(1). Retrieved August 15,
2002,
from
http://www.firstmonday.dk/issues/issue3_1/noble/index.html
Owston, R.D. (1997). The World Wide Web: A technology to
enhance teaching and learning? Educational Researcher, 26(2),
27–33.
Patton, M.Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research
methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Petrides, L.A. (2002). Web-based technologies for distributed
(or distance) learning: Creating learning-centered educational
experiences in the higher education classroom. International
Journal of Instructional Media, 29(1), 69–77.
Poole, D.M. (2000). Student participation in a discussion-
oriented online course: A case study. Journal of Research on
Computing in Education, 33(2), 162–177.

Rourke, J.R. (2001). Online learning: Fad or fate? Principal
Leadership, 1(9), 8–14.
Rovai, A.P. (2002). Sense of community, perceived cognitive
learning, and persistence in asynchronous learning networks.
Internet and Higher Education, 5, 319–332.
Santovec, M.L. (2003). Faculty development. Distance
Education Report, 7(2), 8.
Schrum, L. (2002). Oh, What wonders you will see: Distance
education past, present, and future. Learning and Leading with
Technology, 30(3), 6–9, 20–21.
Schrum, L.M. (2000). Guarding the promise of online learning.
Education Digest, 66(4), 43–47.
Smith, P.L., & Ragan, T.J. (2000). Instructional design. New
York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Vonderwell, S. (2003). An examination of asynchronous
communication experiences and perspectives of students in an
online
course: A case study. Internet and Higher Education, 6, 77–90.
Woods, R.H. (2002). How much communication is enough in
online courses? Exploring the relationship between frequency of
instructor-initiated personal email and learners’ perceptions of
and participation in online learning. International Journal of
Instructional Media, 29(4), 377–394.

http:www.firstmonday.dkissuesissues4_12index.html
http:www.firstmonday.dkissuesissues2_11index.html
http:www.firstmonday.dkissuesissues3_1nobleindex.html
Improving online learning: Student perceptions of useful and
challenging characteristicsIntroductionLiterature
reviewStudents' perceived strengths of online learningStudents'
perceived weaknesses of online learningResearch
designParticipantsAssumption and limitationsData
collectionData analysisResultsWhat makes a learner successful
in an online environment?What creates barriers or
challenges?DiscussionConclusionInterview protocolReferences
INFT 101
Rough Draft of Discussion Board Forum 2 Instructions
For this assignment, you will write a 5-paragraph essay focused
on the topic assigned in Module/Week 4 (refer to the Article
Selection for Discussion Board Forum 2 assignment). So far,
you have selected a relevant journal article in Module/Week 4
and created an outline or map in Module/Week 5. In addition to
writing your rough draft and submitting it through the regular
assignment link this module/week, you will also submit the
draft through the SafeAssign link. Finally, you will submit the
final product as a thread to Discussion Board Forum 2 in
Module/Week 8.
It is very important to read and apply all instructor feedback as
you work on this essay. Also, include citations in current APA
format within the text and reference entries at the end. The
essay must also be properly double spaced with indented
paragraphs. Here is the organizational structure that you must
follow:
Paragraph #1 – Introduction
Provide an introduction to the given topic. You may do this by
providing an interesting quotation, a story, or using another way

to get your reader’s attention. End the introduction with a solid
thesis statement that previews the rest of the essay.
Paragraph #2 – Summary
Summarize the article that you chose (and your instructor
approved) in Module/Week 4. Cover the main points of the
article with your summary and connect it to your overall
topic. Do not forget to cite any paraphrased or summarized
information.
Paragraph #3 – Reflection
Reflect on the content of the article. What have you learned
from reading the article? Did it surprise you? Challenge you?
Do you feel that the conclusions provided in the article are
accurate when compared to other course material and to
Scripture? Why or why not? Support any opinion with credible
sources and/or Scripture.
Paragraph #4 – Application
How will you apply what you have learned about this topic to
your role as an online student? What steps will you take to
apply what you have learned about this topic to your life and,
more specifically, to your role as an online student?
Paragraph #5 – Conclusion
Conclude with some final thoughts on your topic. What
conclusions can you draw from the article, other course
materials, and the provided Scripture references? Include some
additional applicable biblical references for your reader to
consider.

Internet and Higher Education 7 (2004) 59–70Improving online.docx

Internet and Higher Education 7 (2004) 59–70Improving online.docx

More Related Content

Similar to Internet and Higher Education 7 (2004) 59–70Improving online.docx (20)

More from mariuse18nolet (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Internet and Higher Education 7 (2004) 59–70Improving online.docx