Introduction

The quality of distance education is a salient topic in education today. This paper will present a review of the applicable literature concerning both student and faculty attitudes and perceptions towards distance education and how that can affect quality. This paper will present a wide variety of studies that assess both faculty and student attitudes towards distance education in the following areas:

Preparation: This details the amount of time and effort invested on the part of the instructor in preparing the learning environment. For the student if refers to the amount of time becoming familiar with the environment and the subject matter.

Instructional Support: For the faculty member, he or she needs to know that distance education is supported by the institution and will be respected and rewarded. He or she also needs to know that there will be technical support available if and when needed. For the student this deals with a need for support either in dealing with content or technical issues. These are factors that need to be articulated by the instructor as to how they should be handled.

Motivation & Purpose: This speaks to the reason the faculty member is teaching the course. Most faculty are intrinsically motivated to teach in a distance environment but there is often a lack of extrinsic reward. For the student it deals with the reasons for taking the course and the motivation for accomplishing the goal of course completion.

Philosophical Stance: For the faculty member and the student alike this deals with pre-conceived notions and opinions about distance education and its benefits.

These areas provide the lens through which the studies will be examined. By looking through this lens we can begin to predict whether a distance education situation will have a high level of faculty and student satisfaction.

methodology of review

The research studies chosen for this literature review focused on attitudes of students and faculty and factors that can affect attitude. In selecting literature to review, the author attempted to review literature that literature that was relatively current and no older than 8 years. Therefore, the range of dates used was from 2001-2007. The keywords used for searches were: distance education, attitude, faculty. Included in this review are a small number of descriptive articles or summaries. One study was included from 1998 due to the focus on community.

faculty

We begin with a study (Williams, 2003) that used a panel of distance education experts to develop a list of roles and competencies for faculty taking part in distance education. The roles and competencies developed by the panel of experts reveals a surprising finding, that the top competency is not technological skill, but rather collaboration and teamwork skills. Basic technology proficiency is ranked at number two, indicating that it is still important, but not as important as the ability to work with others in a collaborative setting and be an appropriate team player.

The author notes that each role is not necessarily assigned to one person but rather that one person can accept many roles. This speaks to the first part of our analytical tool, that of preparation and purpose. Without a clear sense of purpose, faculty will reach a level of frustration and quickly default to undesirable behaviors (Feldon, in press). Provided there is an appropriate level of preparation prior to accepting the challenge of teaching a distance education course, there is a lessened chance of frustration. Alongside preparation faculty must have a strong sense of purpose as to why the class is being taught using distance education as opposed to a more traditional classroom. This sense of purpose provides an intrinsic motivation. There must also be appropriate instructional support in the event of a problem, again lessening frustration and maintaining a positive attitude.

The next study (Yang & Cornelious, 2007) notes that instructors are required to take on new roles when teaching in distance education. The author points out a shift in distance education from the more traditional pedagogical stance of dispensing information in a lecture format. This shift in roles causes a change to a more student-centered form of learning, and the instructor functions as a filter for content. (Kettner-Polley, 1999).

As noted in the first study, technological competency is necessary, although not paramount. Yang and Cornelious indicate that instructors who are going to be teaching a distance education course would be wise to spend time learning new skills in the arena of technology. This speaks to the preparation aspect of our analytical tool. If the instructor invests time in learning new technological skills in preparation for teaching through distance education the students will reap a benefit by having an instructor familiar with the environment. This will also allow the instructor to focus more on content and less on controlling the technology. This investment, however, comes at a high price in that institutions often do not reward this investment with promotions or tenure. In terms of his or her career, an instructor may be better served spending time writing for journal publications as opposed to learning new technological skills.

The study also notes that online learning environments require a slightly different philosophical stance that coincides with a more problem-based learning situation. The authors claim that this leads to students thinking more “critically, actively, and deeply”. (Yang & Cornelious, 2007, p. 7).

The next study (Lee, 2001) deals with faculty motivation as impacted by instructional support. The study surveyed 170 faculty members from 25 institutions and focused on whether the availability and amount of instructional support had a direct effect on faculty motivation, commitment, and satisfaction. The findings indicate that “faculty motivation and commitment toward distance teaching were strong in general” (Lee, 2001, p. 1). The study goes on to find that “faculty motivation and commitment were higher in the institutions with well-provided institutional support”. In looking at this finding through the eyes of our analytical tool we again see that instructional support is a critical component of a mixture that can predict faculty attitude towards distance teaching.

The study also found that faculty tend to regard instructional support as lacking, and yet the results indicate that faculty motivation towards distance teaching remains at a high level. This would indicate that if faculty are provided stronger levels of support (and prior training as a corollary) faculty motivation will continue to rise. It can also be posited that if there were a higher level of tangible rewards (i.e. tenure, raises) faculty motivation levels would continue to rise.

A more recent study (Kosak et al., 2005) surveyed instructors in the University of North Carolina system indicated that there was a sufficient level of training and that the training was accessible and convenient. It was also noted to be relevant to the needs of the instructor and training was not compulsory. This combination of appropriate training offered at times and dates convenient to instructors provides a strong showing of support of the faculty who will be teaching in these types of distance scenarios. The study noted a high level of responses to the survey and portend that the high rate of response indicates “the importance of the subject matter to educators” (Kosak et al., 2005, p. 20). Faculty note that the use of web-based “just-in-time” training is helpful and needed and would decrease the need for live support offered by a human being. This finding again speaks to the need for appropriate training prior to beginning a teaching situation and appropriate instructional support through convenient, easily-accessible means during a teaching situation.

So far the studies reviewed in this paper have all been researching institutions in the United States of America. The next study (Li & Lindner, 2007) takes place in China and intends to analyze faculty adoption behavior as it applies to distance education. The authors believe that distance education can help educate China’s rural population. China, unlike the United States, is uncovered to have a faculty less interested in distance education. The study reveals that 70 percent of the faculty that responded to the survey questioning faculty attitudes and adoption behaviors were still in the initial stages of innovation, and possessed either no knowledge, possessed knowledge, or were still in persuasion stages. The other 30 percent report being in the decision stage, the implementation stage, or the confirmation stage. This latter group still does not necessarily indicate that they are ready to begin teaching through distance education, just that they are more inclined to do so. The reasons for such low numbers deal with the lack of access to computers by both faculty and the rural population and lack of knowledge for both parties. This speaks again to the need for appropriate training for both faculty as well as the rural population before distance education can be considered a viable option. Without this training and preparation, a distance education scenario would result in low levels of faculty and student satisfaction.

Faculty attitude toward distance education is closely tied to pre-existing notions that are not necessarily supported by research. While there is a view that distance courses result in lower levels of cognition (Miller & Pilcher, 2001) this study’s authors found that the level of cognition is equal in both traditional and distance education courses (Jones, Lindner, Murphy, & Dooley, 2002). Faculty attitudes towards distance education can be only partially swayed through the use of research if there is not a strong showing of support by the institution. The study’s authors note that “To accomplish this task the administration has to first persuade faculty to adopt the model” (Jones, Lindner, Murphy, & Dooley, 2002, p. 2). The study surveyed 252 faculty members in a College of Agriculture at a land grant institution.

The study concludes that a majority of those involved in distance education are not opposed to distance education on philosophical grounds, and that philosophical stance affected only perceived value. The authors note that “the increasing value of distance education must be communicated more effectively in order to impact the philosophical positioning of those opposed to distance education” (Jones, Lindner, Murphy, & Dooley, 2002, p. 9). This study supports this paper’s position that philosophical stances is an appropriate indicator that can be used to predict overall success and satisfaction for both faculty and students. When dealing with faculty with a determined philosophical opposition to distance education overall success will be lower as will satisfaction levels. The value must be articulated by the institution itself in order to positively affect opposing faculty viewpoints.

Faculty must also answer the question as to the motivation for incorporating distance education into a previously successful curriculum. In successful higher education institutions the question must be asked as to whether the affordances are present to offset the possible faculty backlash towards distance education. One topic addressed by the next study (Sugar, Crawley, & Fine, 2005) is that higher education faculty are not the only educators facing pressure to implement more technology into the curriculum. Public school teachers report a low level of readiness in implementing computers into the classroom. That is to say that if students entering higher education institutions are frustrated due to the lack of technology in their secondary education, how much more frustrated will they be for the lack of it in higher education? This study revealed that public school teachers feel as though support for more technology in the public school classroom is supported by “everyone” (Sugar, Crawley, & Fine, 2005, p. 333). Perhaps a survey of higher education faculty would reveal similar findings.

The next article for consideration (Maguire, 2005) reveals a problem that is plaguing distance education writ large; the lack of a set of standards by which to judge the quality of a distance education scenario. The review also reveals that faculty are concerned with the threat of fewer jobs and the decline in the use of full-time faculty. This refers to the use of adjunct instructors that often have lesser degrees and faculty believe this lessens the quality of the education.

As noted earlier, if public school teachers are feeling pressured to incorporate technology, surely some of that pressure comes from the students. This pressure will be even further exerted when students enter higher education due to the changing nature of communication among students. This review notes a study from 1998 that reveals two sources of pressure, “the administration and prospective students” (Betts, 1998). If this pressure was being exerted nearly ten years ago, how much more is it being exerted today? The review goes on to again note that a lack of training has a direct impact on faculty attitude, further supporting this paper’s notion that the level of training availability and convenience has a direct affect on the quality of a distance education scenario and satisfaction rates.

Another issue regarding motivation for faculty is the lack of an articulated benefit to distance education. The research is not clear as to whether distance education provides a quantifiable benefit to education, and faculty question its effectiveness. One study “estimated and compared the differences between the academic performance of students enrolled in distance education courses relative to those enrolled in traditional settings, as demonstrated by their final course grades/ scores” (Shachar & Neumann, 2003, p. 1). The results of this study reveal that distance education students scored higher than students in traditional courses. This was calculated using 86 studies that were characterized as experimental or quasi-experimental. The authors note that the study’s findings have implications in a variety of areas, such as:

Academic Institutions and Policy Makers: Educational institutions (mostly in the higher levels of academia) have adopted these new DE methods as the educational delivery systems of the future. We have seen the insertion of DE delivery methods into learning programs in a variety of formats: optional, complementary, interchangeable, or full and completely on-line programs. These institutions should be encouraged to invest in DE technology, implement DE learning programs, and transform some existing F2F courses to DE so that a wider range of students, regardless of age or geographic location, may enroll in quality learning programs. The realistic possibility of hybrid programs, providing the student with the best of both worlds, may likewise be enhanced.

Students: When offered the option of DE as a means of pursuing their academic quest, students can now choose solely on the merits and quality of the program offered, without fear that DE may hinder their academic performance outcomes. For those prepared to commit themselves to this form of study, need not wonder if the DE option of learning anywhere, anytime and at any-pace, is any good. This study may provide positive reassurance, subject to their serious assessment of their specific field of study. (Shachar & Neumann, 2003, p. 16-17)

This quote speaks directly to our analytical tool and the need for further articulation of the value of distance education to affect student learning. This can cause a change in both motivation and philosophical stance, two crucial parts of the appropriate mixture for a successful distance education scenario.

students

The model to be used in analyzing studies dealing with students does not differ from the model articulated for use with faculty. The same areas of preparation & purpose, instructional support, philosophical stance and motivation apply equally to the learner as it does to the instructor. This model serves to provide a predictor to student success and satisfaction just as it does to predict faculty satisfaction and course quality.

Provided that students are convinced that the media utilized by the instructor (i.e. online video, recorded lectures viewed on videotape or DVD, etc) students’ perceptions must be that the media meets class objectives (Allen, Bourhis, Burrell, & Mabry, 2002, p. 85). This study is a meta-analysis and reveals that there is a slight preference on the part of students for the traditional education format when compared with distance education. Since this study is from the year 2002, and data was collected prior, the study would be well served to be repeated in light of technological advances facilitating media delivery. The study also reveals little difference in student satisfaction levels. This can be attributed to our analytical model in that in the studies collected revealed students who were unfamiliar with and unprepared to use the technology required for this course. Given the savvy nature of today’s students, I would posit that this study would return different results if done with more current data.

Another facet to the analytical tool is the notion of purpose. If a student’s purpose in taking distance education course is to earn a graduate degree, one possible factor in student satisfaction is the usefulness of that degree. A study conducted through surveying higher education search committees (Adams & DeFleur, 2005) indicated that candidates possessing doctorate degrees earned entirely online are at a severe disadvantage to those candidates with more traditional degrees. This will cause student satisfaction to decrease if employment is not available due to the way the degree was earned. This is a result of philosophical stance on the part of search committees who do not see the value of distance education programs and particularly those without brick-and-mortar buildings. Mention was made of online universities as providing pay-for degrees and were dubbed “diploma mills” despite accreditation. Another detractor was the skepticism that appropriate mentoring can occur at a virtual university. Until this stance changes by the more established academic community, student satisfaction levels will remain low for those students seeking to enter the land of academe.

The next study detailed the effectiveness of interactive multimedia in e-learning (Zhang, 2005). The author performed two experiments looking significantly at the level of interactiveness in e-learning. This is an important factor affecting student satisfaction when viewed in the light of the current shift in distance education from a lecture-centered environment to a student-centered environment. The study revealed that students appreciated the ability to rewind, fast forward, and pause when needed. The control given to students positively impacted student satisfaction with interactive media delivery. As noted by the author, “a key challenge is to provide learners with easy, intuitive, and fast access to the content”. (Zhang, 2005, p. 149). This access facilitates student-content interaction. When students are given this type of control, the motivation to perform well in the course increases as does the sense of purpose and therefore a sense of satisfaction. This study evaluated a variety of content areas and the findings were consistent across the board.

Another study dealing with student motivation found that students who take online courses are typically at a higher level of maturity and are older, yet are less motivated (Qureshi, Morton, & Antosz, 2002). This relationship was unexpected by the authors and seems to be related to a lack of time on the part of the student and the cost associated with distance learning. The authors also note the possibility that encountering one’s peers in a typical classroom environment provides a level of motivation not experienced in distance education scenarios.

According to our analytical tool, preparation & purpose serve as predictors to student success and satisfaction in a distance education situation. One study (Cavanaugh, 2001) shows that students who are already predisposed to high levels of academic performance - as indicated by a high GPA from high school – will perform well in higher education scenarios. The effect in favor of distance education was rather small, and the author notes that “interactive distance education programs that combine an individualized approach with traditional classroom instruction” resulted in a higher level of student performance. It is worth noting that this study was published in 2001 and the results would perhaps be different if conducted today given advances in technology and media delivery. The study also revealed that foreign language classes showed a negative effect. This can be explained due to the nature of second language learning and the need for hearing appropriate pronunciation and immediate feedback and confirmation when the language learner speaks. The study also showed that the use of small groups and diversification of techniques helped improve student success and performance.

Another factor in increasing student satisfaction and performance is the establishment of community. The next study indicates that “communities of learners encourage knowledge building and social reinforcement” (Moller, 1998) and shows that this community is necessary for learning to take place. Specifically, this study indicates that there is a type of learning only possible through the use of these asynchronous communities. This is due to the fact that the students are interacting separately. First the students interact with the content, and then later they interact with each other and/or the instructor. This use of community goes to the heart of purpose and motivation, and is a clear factor in predicting student success and performance.

implications for further research

It is recommended that researchers apply the model presented in this paper to help predict both faculty and student satisfaction as well as student performance. The distance education community would be well served by such a model that could be consulted in the construction of a course. The individual components of the model are:

Philosophical Stance: For the faculty member and the student alike this deals with pre-conceived notions and opinions about distance education and its benefits.

This model would be well served if adopted by faculty members intending to teach in a distance education scenario or considering doing so, course designers, and students taking distance education classes or considering doing so. This model would also benefit from further research to evaluate and develop the model further.

References

Adams, J., & DeFleur, M. H. (2005). The acceptability of a doctoral degree earned online as a credential for obtaining a faculty position. The American Journal of Distance Education, 19(2), 71-85.

Allen, M., Bourhis, J., Burrell, N., & Mabry, E. (2002). Comparing student satisfaction with distance education to traditional classrooms in higher education: a meta-analysis. The American Journal of Distance Education, 16(2), 83-97.

Betts, K. S. (1998). An institutional overview: factors influencing faculty participation in distance education in postsecondary education in the United States: an institutional study . Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 1(3). Retrieved June 22, 2007, from http://www.westga.edu/‌~distance/‌betts13.html

Cavanaugh, C. S. (2001). The effectiveness of interactive distance education technologies in K-12 learning: a meta-analysis. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 7(1), 73-88.

Feldon, D. F. (in press). Cognitive load and classroom teaching: The double-edged sword of automaticity. Educational Psychologist.

Jones, E. T., Lindner, J. R., Murphy, T. H., & Dooley, K. E. (2002). Faculty philosophical position towards distance education: competency, value, and educational technology support. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 5(1). Retrieved June 22, 2007, from http://www.westga.edu/‌~distance/‌ojdla/‌spring51/‌jones51.html

Kettner-Polley, R. B. (1999). The making of a virtual professor. ALN Magazine, 3(1).

Kosak, L., Manning, D., Dobson, E., Rogerson, L., Cotnam, S., Colaric, S., et al. (2005). Prepared to teach online? Perspectives of faculty in the Unviersity of North Carolina system. Paper presented at National Educational Computing Conference, Philadelphia, PA. Retrieved June 22, 2007, from http://center.uoregon.edu/‌ISTE/‌NECC2005/‌program/‌search_results_details.php?sessionid=7248775

Lee, J. (2001). Instructional support for distance education and faculty motivation, commitment, satisfaction. British Journal of Educational Technology, 32(2), 153-160.

Li, Y., & Lindner, J. R. (2007). Faculty adoption behaviour about web-based distance education: a cast study from China Agricultural University. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(1), 83-94.

Maguire, L. L. (2005). Literature review - faculty participation in online distance education: barriers and motivators. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 8(1). Retrieved June 22, 2007, from http://www.westga.edu/‌~distance/‌ojdla/‌spring81/‌maguire81.htm

Miller, G., & Pilcher, C. L. (2001). Levels of cognition reached in agricultural distance education courses in comparison to on-campus courses and to faculty perceptions concerning an appropriate level. Journal of Agricultural Education, 42(1), 20-27.

Moller, L. (1998). Designing communities of learners for asynchronous distance education. Educational Technology Research & Development, 46(4), 115-122.

Qureshi, E., Morton, L., & Antosz, E. (2002). An interesting profile - university students who take distance education courses show weaker motivation than on-campus students. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 5(4). Retrieved June 22, 2007, from http://www.westga.edu/‌~distance/‌ojdla/‌winter54/‌Quershi54.htm

Shachar, M., & Neumann, Y. (2003). Differences between traditional and distance education academic performances: a meta-analytic approach. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 4(2). Retrieved June 22, 2007, from http://www.irrodl.org/‌index.php/‌irrodl/‌article/‌view/‌153/‌704

Sugar, W., Crawley, F., & Fine, B. (2005). Critiquing theory of planned behaviour as a method to assess teachers’ technology integration attitudes. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(2), 331-334.

Williams, P. E. (2003). Roles and competencies for distance education programs in higher education institutions. The American Journal of Distance Education, 17(1), 45-57.

Yang, Y., & Cornelious, L. F. (2007). Preparing instructors for quality online instruction. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration. Retrieved June 19, 2007, from http://www.openj-gate.org/‌include/‌redirect.asp?JCode=81226&Source=1&type=J&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Ewestga%2Eedu%2F%257Edistance%2Fojdla%2Fspring81%2Fyang81%2Ehtm