Online Teaching and Learning:  A Bibliography and Annotated Literature Review

by

Cathy Anderson, Ph.D.

(*Articles with asterisks are annotated.)

Abdellatief, M., Abu Bakar, M. S., Marzanah, A. J., & Abdullah, R. (2011).*

A technique for quality evaluation of E-learning from developers’ perspective. American Journal of Economics and Business Administration, 3(1), 157-164. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1025014854?accountid=28844

REVIEW:  The authors stated they conducted their study as follows:  “We conducted extensive survey on quality evaluation methods proposed in the literature, (McCall, 1979; Pruengkarn et al., 2005; Baruque et al., 2007; Ozkan and Koseler, 2009; Wang et al., 2007; Akinson and McBeath, 2004; Yunus and Salim, 2008). Also extensive review was conducted on e-learning systems (Jabr and Omari, 2010; El-Sofany et al., 2009; Ghaleb et al., 2006; Harbouche and Djoudi, 2007; Hirzallah, 2007).

Research Design:

• Step 1: Design a questionnaire for collecting data from developer, who are developing e-learning websites.

• Step 2: Assign points and assign the value for each attributes, which are obtain from questionnaires.
• Step 3: Compute the attributes value, sub-characteristics value and the value of Quality Characteristics (QC).
• Step 4: Compute the Total Quality (TQ) of e- Learning website

SUMMARY:  In this study the authors  proposed four quality characteristics named Service Content, System Functionality, Information Technology and System Reliability they then proposed 11 sub-characteristics with attributes.

Abraime, P., Bernard, R, Bures,E, , Borokhovski, E., & Tamin, R. (2011).*

Interaction in distance education and online learning: Using evidence and theory to improve practice. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 23(2-3), 82-103. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12528-011-9043-x

REVIEW:  Identifies the essential types of interaction in online education as student to student, student with faculty and student to content interaction.  Provided an overview of the following evidence-based approaches to instructional design as:

• Self-regulation principles
• Multimedia learning principles
• Motivational design principles
• Collaborative and cooperative learning principles.

SUMMARY:  In summary the main points of their findings are as follows:

• First, knowledge tools must be structured so they increase the efficiency of learning as well as the effectiveness of learning.

• Second, students need more guidance about when to use the tool and not only whether to use it.

• Third, like any tool, physical or cognitive, users need practice to use the tool well and wisely.

• Fourth, cognitive tools and learning strategies may work best when they are an integral feature of a course or program of study and not an add-on.

Bennett, S., & Santy, J. (2009).*

A window on our teaching practice: Enhancing individual online  

Nurse Education in Practice, 9(6), 403-406. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nepr.2009.01.019

REVIEW AND SUMMARY:  This is a case study analysis of online learning and teaching that analyzes the observations of the researchers in their peer observation of online courses.  This analysis also covers the details of a discussion with their peers regarding online education.  

The authors define “Peer observation is typically understood as a process whereby a teacher participates as an observer in a lesson (or other form of educational delivery) to facilitate exploration and evaluation of the learning and teaching process.”  

As they stated, their intention was to explore the potential of an  idea and take an action learning approach by observing the online learning environment.   They found that using the internet for online professional development was a source of support, allowed for transdisciplinary observations, and was a viable mode of content delivery.

Bonnel, W., & Boehm, H. (2011).

Improving feedback to students online: Teaching tips from experienced faculty. The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 42(11), 503-9. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.3928/00220124-20110715-02

This is a survey based study that was conducted in  two parts.  The first part was to gather information regarding the faculty backgrounds and how they approached gathering feedback.  IN Phase II the researchers conducted further surveys and validated they themes they saw in Phase I.

Fifteen themes describing feedback practices emerged from the open-ended responses. These were defined under three primary categories of tools/technology, being systematic and creating a feedback rich environment. The final discussion identified feedback as a way to enhance their approach by faculty to online teaching.  Feedback can be time intensive but many faculty had found ways and offered suggestions to streamline the process.    Integrating the instruction into professional development offered to instructors in online learning is strongly suggested.

Chapman, B. F., & Henderson, R. G. (2010).*

E-LEARNING QUALITY ASSURANCE: A PERSPECTIVE OF BUSINESS TEACHER EDUCATORS AND DISTANCE LEARNING COORDINATORS. Delta Pi Epsilon Journal, 52(1), 16-31

REVIEW:  The authors state that the purpose of this study was to “examine the extent to which quality measures or benchmarks are present in e-learning business education courses and programs.”

Resarch Design:  Their approach to conduct this study was to conduct survey research in order to  determine “whether benchmarks developed by the Institute for Higher Education Policy (IHEP) are present in online business education courses and programs.”  The participants in this study included 64 business teachers and 62 instructional designers.  

The survey conducted addressed the following; The e-Learning Quality Assessment Survey included 24 Web-based quality assurance benchmarks identified in a research study by the Institute for Higher Education Policy (IHEP) (2002) to be important benchmarks that can be used to assess quality in e-learning courses and programs.

SUMMARY:  In their findings they did find some professional and demographic differences between the business teachers and the distance learning coordinators.  They also found agreements on most of the IHEP quality assurance benchmarks, but some disagreement on the importance of access to instructional resources such as library services.   They agreed that the following were important;  rich course content, effective interaction, excellent reliability, and efficient user-friendliness are also important quality assurance benchmarks in online courses.

Chao, I., Saj, T., & Hamilton, D. (2010).*

Using collaborative course development to achieve online course quality standards. The International Review Of Research In Open And Distance Learning, 11(3), 106-126. Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/912/1644

REVIEW AND Research Design:  This article presents the findings of an analysis of four case studies’ approach into collaborative course development process and the implementation of quality standards at a Canadian university.  

The study had three purposes:

• (1) determining how quality standards can be effectively used and implemented by faculty and instructional designers;
• (2) determining what kinds of collaborative processes involving faculty and instructional design staff best support the implementation of quality review processes; and
• (3) ascertaining how to make the development process as effective as possible by examining both the important elements of course quality and the key elements of collaboration.

SUMMARY:  In addition to the implementation of quality guidelines they found that the implementation of the guidelines in evaluating the quality of the course depended on the experience of the faculty and that the guidelines were especially helpful to less experienced faculty.   They emphasized that faculty and instructional designers felt the guidelines were just that, a guide, and should have some flexibility in application and not serve as a template as each course has unique characteristics.

Chin, C. R., & Hullinger, H. (2008).*

New benchmarks in higher education: Student engagement in online learning. Journal of Education for Business, 84(2), 101-108. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/202823845?accountid=28844

REVIEW:  Their research is embedded in the findings of the National Student Survey of Engagement, (NSSE).  

METHOD:  They conducted a comparative analysis of students in the top performing institutions, nationally, in engaging students in the classroom with students in online.  They found that students in online reported a higher level of faculty student engagement, but lower levels of academic challenge.  

SUMMARY:  Their findings resulted in confirming that the design of a course should focus on increasing student-faculty interaction on resources and related activities to the course.

Chou, P. (2012).*

Teaching strategies in online discussion board: A framework in higher education. Higher Education Studies, 2(2), 25-30. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1045456389?accountid=28844

REVIEW, Research Design and SUMMARY:  Detailed description of the above five factors  identified in the literature review was discussed as follows:

• 1)  Collaborative Learning (Peers Support/ Cooperation/Familiar with Peers/ Social Loafing)
• 2)  Instructional Strategies (Posting Guidelines/Strategies/ Question type/Argumentation)
• 3)  Instructor’ role/ Mentor Support
• 4)  Communication (Interaction/Technical Errors/ Social Presence)
• 5)  Course Guideline/Resources

In response to the five factors discussed earlier, a cost-effective instructional framework to promote online asynchronous discussions was proposed. The strategy, which makes full use of web 2.0 tools (free tools), was summarized as follows:

• 1. Blogging (related to factor 1 and factor 2)
• 2.  Skype (related to factor 3 and factor 4)
• 3. Podcasting (related to factor 5)
• 4.  Facebook (related to factor 1)
• 5.  Wiki (related to factor 1 and factor 2)

They initiated a pilot project to evaluate the above factors’ efficacy in an online course. They concluded that implementing the tools in online would support student learning.

Cook-Wallace, M. (2012).*

Testing the significance of core components of online education. The Business Review, Cambridge,19(2), 64-70. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1021060398?accountid=28844

REVIEW, Research Method and SUMMARY:  According to the researcher “the purpose of the study was to examine major important and effective components pertaining to online teaching perceived from administrators of online teaching programs.  The four significant core components examined and proposed were teaching online policy, educational technology standards, full-time equivalency (FTE), and technical support.”

This study exhibits several components relevant to online education program development. Research questions were developed to guide the study.

• 1. What are the core components that characterize successful online education programs as most important and least important?
• 2. What are the core components that characterize successful online education programs as most effective and least effective?
• 3. To what extent are core components of online education programs important?
• 4. To what extent are core components of online education programs effective?

Essentially this is  “sub-study of an original survey consisting of 25 questions posed to those who were administrators of online teaching. This study identified three major areas of issues and practices relating to commitment, administration, and technology within online education.”

Crawford-Ferre, H., Wiest, L., . (2012). *

SUMMARY:  The researchers presented effective online instructin practices such as:  course design, interaction among course participants, instructor participation and support.

Dechant, K., & Dechant, L. (2010).*

Using systems theory to conceptualize the implementation of undergraduate online education in a university setting. Organization Management Journal, 7(4), 291-300. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/omj.2010.38

REVIEW:  The authors, Kathleen Dechant is a professor and Lauren Dechant is an instructional designer are knowledgeable of online learning design and adult education theory sought to develop a road map for university-wide quality undergraduate online education as part of a task force team.  This article is a reflection of their experiences on the task force.

SUMMARY:  They found the following results:

• Online learning development should be linked to  and integrated within the academic plan

• A systems approach should be applied to the evaluation

• Instructors must learn new methods a procedures that are different from the traditional classroom setting

• Faculty roles change and they must acquire new skills and be compensated differently for teaching online

• Students need to learn in new ways and must possess different self-management skills

Dykman Charlene, A., & During, Charles, K. (2008).•

Online education forum - part three A quality online educational experience. Journal of Information Systems Education, 19(3), 281-289. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/200158301?accountid=28844

REVIEW:

This article is a review of the literature, an overview of the author’s experience, and application of best practices to online learning.  As a result of their research the authors identified the following essential elements of quality in online education:

• The structure of the course management system

• STandardized approach to course design:
• Standard look and feel
• Complete profiles
• Modular Course Content
• Unit Structure
• Discussion questions
• Feedback and Grading

• Planning Perspective:
• Basic Philosophy
• Pace of delivery
• Basis for grading
• Assessment of performance
• Preparing for problems
• Course Preparation

• Clearly defined learning objectives
• Formal Objectives
• Critical First Steps
• Clarity of purpose

• Consistent interaction with learners
• Effective collaboration

• Clear expectations for learners
• Measurable objectives
• Formal statement of expectations
• Learning crises

• Significance of class sizes
• Time commitment
• Critical Mass
• Learning objectives and course delivery