Media and Pedagogy in Undergraduate Distance Education: A Theory-Based Meta-Analysis of Empirical Literature

Abstract

This meta-analysis employs a theoretical framework in quantitatively synthesizing empirical studies that investigate the effects of distance education (DE) versus classroom instruction on undergraduate student achievement. Analyses of 218 findings from 103 studies were conducted according to how media were used to support DE pedagogy. The results indicate that the effect sizes far synchronous instructor-directed DE were consistent and not significantly different from zero; in asynchronous DE, media only supporting independent learning was generally less effective than media supporting collaborative discussion among students, although both subsets were significantly heterogeneous. Follow-up analysis of asynchronous DE findings was framed in terms of three patterns of interaction—student-content, student-instructor and student-student.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. References marked with an asterisk indicate studies in the meta-analysis.

  2. Abrami, P. C., & Bures, E. M. (1996). Computer-supported collaborative learning and distance education. American Journal of Distance Education, 10(2), 37–42.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Abrami, P. C., Chambers, B., Poulsen, C., De Simone, C., d'Apollonia, S., & Howden, J. (1995). Classroom connections: Understanding and using cooperative learning. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Harcourt-Brace.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Abrami, P.C., Cohen, P., & d'Apollonia, S. (1988). Implementation problems in meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 58(2), 151–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Anderson, T. (2003). Models of interaction in distance education: Recent developments and research questions. In M. G. Moore and W. G. Anderson, (Eds.), Handbook of Distance Education. Mahwah, HJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  6. *Appleton, A. S., Dekkers, J., & Sharma, R. (1989, August). Improved teaching excellence by using Tutored Video Instruction: An Australian case study. Paper presented at the 11th EAIR Forum. Trier, Germany.

  7. *Bacon, S. F., & Jakovich, J. A. (2001). Instructional television versus traditional teaching of an introductory psychology course. Teaching of Psychology, 28(2), 88–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. *Barkhi, R., Jacob, V. S., & Pirkul, H. (1999). An experimental analysis of face-to-face versus computer mediated communication channels. Group Decision and Negotiation, 8, 325–347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. *Bartel, K. B. (1998). A comparison of students taught utilizing distance education and traditional education environments in beginning microcomputer applications classes at Utah State University. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Utah State University, Logan.

  10. *Beare, P. L. (1989). The comparative effectiveness of videotape, audiotape, and tele-lec-ture in delivering continuing teacher education. The American Journal of Distance Education, 3(2), 57–66.

    Google Scholar 

  11. *Benbunan, R. (1997). Effects of computer-mediated communication systems on learning, performance and satisfaction: A comparison of groups and individuals solving ethical scenarios. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The State University of New Jersey, Newark, NJ.

  12. *Benbunan-Fich, R., Hiltz, S. R., & Turoff, M. (2001). A comparative content analysis of face-to-face vs. ALN-mediated teamwork. Proceedings of the 34th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences—2001.

  13. Bernard, R. M., Abrami, P. C., Lou, Y., & Borokhovski, E. (2004). A Methodological morass? How we can improve quantitative research in distance education. Distance Education, 25(2), 175–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Bernard, R. M., Abrami, P. C., Lou, Y. Borokhovski, E., Wade, A., Wozney, L., Wallet, P.A., Fiset, M., & Huang, B. (2004). How Does Distance Education Compare to Classroom Instruction? A Meta-Analysis of the Empirical Literature. Review of Educational Research, 74(3), 379–439.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Bernard, R. M., Brauer, A., Abrami, P. C., & Surkes, M. (2004). The development of a questionnaire for predicting online learning achievement. Distance Education, 25(1), 31–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. *Boulet, M. M., Boudreault, S., & Guerette, L. (1998). Effects of a television distance education course in computer science. British Journal of Educational Technology, 29(2), 101–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. *Brown, B. W., & Liedholm, C. E. (2002). Can Web courses replace the classroom in principles of microeconomics? The American Economic Review, 92(2), 444–448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. *Browning, J. B. (1999). Analysis of concepts and skills acquisition differences between Web-delivered and classroom-delivered undergraduate instructional technology courses. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC.

  19. *Cahill, D., & Catanzaro, D. (1997). Teaching first-year Spanish on-line. Calico Journal, 14(2–4), 97–114.

    Google Scholar 

  20. *Callahan, A. L., Givens, P. E., & Bly, R. (1998, June). Distance education moves into the 21st century: A comparison of delivery methods. Paper presented at the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference, Seattle, WA.

  21. *Campbell, M., Floyd, J., & Sheridan, J. B. (2002). Assessment of student performance and attitudes for courses taught online versus onsite. The Journal of Applied Business Research, 18(2), 45–51.

    Google Scholar 

  22. *Carey, J. M. (2001). Effective student outcomes: A comparison of online and face-to-face delivery modes. Retrieved April 30, 2003 from http://teleeducation.nb.ca/con-tent/pdf/english/DEOSNEWS_11.9_effective-student-outcomes.pdf.

  23. Carpenter, C. R., Greenhill, L. P. (1955). An Investigation of Closed-Circuit Television for Teaching University Courses. (Report 1). The Pennsylvania State University.

  24. Carpenter, C.R., & Greenhill, L.P. (1958). An Investigation of Closed-Circuit Television for Teaching University Courses. (Report 2). Pennsylvania State University.

  25. *Carrell, L. J., & Menzel, K. E. (2001). Variations in learning, motivation, and perceived immediacy between live and distance education classrooms. Communication Education, 50(3), 230–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. *Casanova, R. S. (2001). Student performance in an online general college chemistry course. Retrieved April 30, 2003 from http://www.chem.vt.edu/confchem/2001/c/04/capefear.html.

  27. 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. Retrieved April 30, 2001 from http://www.unf.edu/ccavanau/CavanaughIJET01.pdf.

  28. Chickering, A., & Ehrmann, S. C. (1996). Implementing the seven principles: Technology as lever. AAHE Bulletin, October, pp. 3–6.

  29. Chickering, A., & Gamson, Z. (1987). Seven principles of good practice in undergraduate education. AAHE Bulletin, 39(2), 3–7.

    Google Scholar 

  30. *Cifuentes, L., & Hughey, J. (1998, February). Computer conferencing and multiple intelligences: Effects on expository writing. In Proceedings of selected research and development presentations at the National Convention of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT). St. Louis, MO.

  31. *Clack, D., Talbert, L., Jones, P., & Dixon, S. (2002). Collegiate skills versatile schedule courses. Retrieved April 30, 2003 from http://www.schoolcraft.cc.mi.us/leagueproject/pdfs/documents/Learning%20First%20Winter%202002.pdf.

  32. Clark, R. E. (1983). Reconsidering research on learning from media. Review of Educational Research. 53(4), 445–459.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Clark, R. E. (1994). Media will never influence learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), 21–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Clark, R. E. (2000). Evaluating distance education: Strategies and cautions. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 1(1), 3–16.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Clark, R. E. (2003). Research on Web-based learning: A half-full glass. In R. Bruning, C. A. Horn, & L. M. PytlikZillig (Eds.), Web-based learning: What do we know? Where do we go? (pp.1–22). Greenwich, CT: Information Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  36. *Coates, D., Humphreys, B. R., Kane, J., Vachris, M., Agarwal, R., & Day, E. (2001, January). “No significant distance” between face to face and online instruction: Evidence from principles of economics. Paper presented at the Meeting of the Allied Social Science Association, New Orleans, Louisiana.

  37. Cobb, T. (1997). Cognitive efficiency: Toward a revised theory of media. Educational Technology Research & Development, 45 (4), 21–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. *Collins, M. (2000). Comparing Web correspondence and lecture versions of a second-year non-major biology course. British Journal of Educational Technology, 31(1), 21–27.

    Google Scholar 

  39. *Cooper, L. W. (2001). A comparison of online and traditional computer applications classes. T.H.E. Journal, 28(8), 52–58.

    Google Scholar 

  40. *Cordover, P. P. (1996). A comparison of a distance education and locally based course in an urban university setting. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Florida International University, Miami, FL.

  41. *Cross, R. F. (1996). Video-taped lectures for honors students on international industry based learning. Distance Education, 17(2), 369–386.

    Google Scholar 

  42. *Dalton, B. (1999). Evaluating distance education. Retrieved April 17, 2003 from http://www.sc.edu/cosw/PDFs/daltonb.pdf.

  43. *Davis, J. D., Odell, M., Abbitt, J., & Amos, D. (1999). Developing online courses: A comparison of Web-based instruction with traditional instruction. In Proceedings of SITE Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference.

  44. *Davis, R. S., & Mendenhall, R. (1998). Evaluation comparison of online and classroom instruction for HEPE 129 - Fitness and Lifestyle Management Course. Brigham Young University. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 427–752)

  45. *Day, T. M., Raven, M. R., & Newman, M. E. (1998). The effects of World Wide Web instruction and traditional instruction and learning styles on achievement and changes in student attitudes in a technical writing in agricommunication course. Journal of Agricultural Education, 39(4), 65–75.

    Google Scholar 

  46. De Simone, C., Lou, Y., & Schmid, R. F. (2001). Meaningful and interactive distance learning supported by the use of metaphor and synthesizing activities. Journal of Distance Education, 16(1), 85–101.

    Google Scholar 

  47. *Dexter, D. J. (1995). Student performance-based outcomes of televised interactive community college. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Colorado State University, Fort Collins.

  48. *Diaz, D. P. (2000). Comparison of student characteristics, and evaluation of student success, in an online health education course. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Nova Southeastern University, Fort Lauderdale, FL.

  49. *DiBartola, L. M., Miller, M. K., & Turley, C. L. (2001). Do learning style and learning environment affect learning outcome? Journal of Allied Health, 30(2), 112–115.

    Google Scholar 

  50. *Dillon, C. L., Gunawardena, C. N., & Parker, R. (1992). Learner support: The critical link in distance education. Distance Education, 13(1), 29–45.

    Google Scholar 

  51. *Dominguez, P. S., & Ridley, D. R. (2001). Assessing distance education courses and discipline differences in their effectiveness. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 28(1), 15–19.

    Google Scholar 

  52. *Dutton, J., Dutton, M., & Perry, J. (2001). Do online students perform as well as lecture students? Retrieved April 28, 2003 from http://www4.ncsu.edu/unity/users/d/dutton/public/research/online.pdf.

  53. Evidence for Policy and Practice Information and Coordinating Centre (EPPI). (2004). What is a systematic review? Retrieved January 25, 2004 from http://eppi.ioe.ac.uk/EPPIWeb/home.aspx?page=/reel/about_reviews.htm.

  54. *Faux, T. L., & Black-Hughes, C. (2000). A comparison of using the Internet versus lectures to teach social work history. Research on Social Work Practice, 10(4), 454–466.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Glass, G. V. (1976). Primary, secondary and meta-analysis of research. Educational Researcher, 10, 38.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Glass, G. V., McGaw, B., & Smith, M. L. (1981). Meta-analysis in social research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  57. *Glenn, A. S. (2001). A comparison of distance learning and traditional learning environments. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 457 778)

  58. *Goodyear, J. M. (1995). A comparison of adult students' grades in traditional and distance education courses. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Alaska Anchorage, Anchorage.

  59. *Grayson, J. P., MacDonald, S. E., & Saindon, J. (2001). The efficacy of Web-based instruction at York University: A case study of Modes of Reasoning, 1730. Retrieved May 13, 2003 from http://www.atkinson.yorku.ca/pgrayson/areport1.pdf.

  60. *Grimes, P. W., Neilsen, J. E., & Ness, J. F. (1988). The performance of nonresident students in the “economics U$A” tele-course. The American Journal of Distance Education, 2(2), 36–43.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Hedges, L. V., & Olkin, I. (1985). Statistical methods for meta-analysis. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Hedges, L. V., Shymansky, J. A., & Woodworth, G. (1989). A practical guide to modern methods of meta-analysis. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 309 952

  63. *Heiens, R. A., & Hulse, D. B. (1996). Two-way interactive television: An emerging technology for university level business school instruction. Journal of Education for Business, 72(2), 74–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Hillman, D., Willis, D. J., & Gunawardena, C. (1994). Learner-interface interaction in distance education: An extension of contemporary models and strategies for practitioners. American Journal of Distance Education, 8(2), 30–42.

    Google Scholar 

  65. *Hiltz, S. R. (1993). Correlates of learning in a virtual classroom. International Journal of Man Machine Studies, 39(1), 71–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. *Hiltz, S. R. (1997). Impacts of college-level courses via asynchronous learning networks: Some preliminary results. Retrieved May 5, 2003 from http://www.aln.org/publica-tions/jaln/index.asp.

  67. *Hodge-Hardin, S. (1997, April). Interactive television vs. a traditional classroom setting: A comparison of student math achievement. In Proceedings of the Mid-South Instructional Technology Conference. Murfreesboro, TN.

  68. *Hogan, R. (1997, July). Analysis of student success in distance learning courses compared to traditional courses. Paper presented at the 6th Annual Conference on Multimedia in Education and Industry, Chattanooga, TN.

  69. Holmberg, B. (1989). Theory and practice of distance learning, 2nd (Ed.). London and new York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Holmberg, B. (2003). A theory of distance education based on empathy. In M. G. Moore and W. G. Anderson (Eds.), Handbook of distance education. Mahwah, HJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  71. *Johnson, K. R. (1993). An analysis of variables associated with student achievement and satisfaction in a university distance education course. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, New York State University, Buffalo.

  72. *Johnson, M. (2002). Introductory biology online: Assessing outcomes of two student populations. Journal of College Science Teaching, 31(5), 312–317.

    Google Scholar 

  73. *Johnson, S. M. (2001). Teaching introductory international relations in an entirely Webbased environment: Comparing student performance across and within groups. Education at a Distance, 15(10).

  74. *Jones, E. R. (1999, February). A comparison of an all Web-based class to a traditional class. Paper presented at the Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education, San Antonio, TX.

  75. *Kaeley, G. S. (1989). Instructional variables and mathematics achievement in face-to-face and distance teaching modes. International Council of Distance Education Bulletin, 15–31.

  76. *Kataoka, H. C. (1987). Long-distance language learning: The second year of televised Japanese. Journal of Educational Techniques and Technologies, 20(2), 43–50.

    Google Scholar 

  77. Keegan, D. (1996). Foundations of distance education (3rd ed). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  78. *Knox, D. M. (1997). A review of the use of video-conferencing for actuarial education-A three-year case study. Distance Education, 18, 225–235.

    Google Scholar 

  79. *Kochman, A., & Maddux, C. D. (2001). Interactive televised distance learning versus on-campus instruction: A comparison of final grades. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34(1), 87–91.

    Google Scholar 

  80. Kozma, R. B. (1994). Will media influence learning? Reframing the debate. Educational Technology Research & Development, 42(2), 7–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. *LaRose, R., Gregg, J., & Eastin, M. (1998). Audiographic telecourses for the Web: An experiment. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication [Online], 4(2), Retrieved May 15, 2003 from http://www.ascusc.org/jcmc/vol4/issue2/larose.html#ABSTRACT.

  82. *Logan, E., & Conerly, K. (2002). Students creating community: An investigation of student interactions in a Web-based distance learning environment. Retrieved April 28, 2003 from http://www.icte.org/T01_Library/T01_253.pdf.

  83. *Long, L., & Javidi, A. (2001). A comparison of course outcomes: Online distance learning versus traditional classroom settings. Retrieved April 28, 2003 from http://www.commu-nication.ilstu.edu/activities/NCA2001/paper_distance_learning.pdf.

  84. Lou, Y. (2004). Learning to solve complex problems through online between-group collaboration. Distance Education. 25(1), 50–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  85. Lou, Y., Abrami, P. C., & d'Apollonia, S. (2001). Small group and individual learning with technology: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 71, 449–521.

    Google Scholar 

  86. Lou, Y., Abrami, P. C., Spence, J. C., Poulsen, C., Chambers, B., & d'Apollonia, S. (Winter 1996). Within-class grouping: A Meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 66, 423–458.

    Google Scholar 

  87. Lou, Y., Dedic, H., & Rosenfield, S. (2003). Feedback model and successful e-learning. In S. Naidu (Ed.), Learning and teaching with technology: Principles and practices (pp. 249–260). London and Sterling, VA: Kogan Page.

    Google Scholar 

  88. *MacFarland, T. W. (1998). A comparison of final grades in courses when faculty concurrently taught the same course to campus-based and distance education students: winter term 1997. Fort Lauderdale, FL: Nova Southeastern University.

    Google Scholar 

  89. *Magiera, F. T. (1994). Teaching managerial finance through compressed video: An alternative for distance education. Journal of Education for Business, 69(5), 273–277.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  90. *Magiera, F. T. (1994–1995). Teaching personal investments via long-distance. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 23(4), 295–307.

    Google Scholar 

  91. *Maki, R. H., Maki, W. S., Patterson, M., & Whittaker, P. D. (2000). Evaluation of a Web-based introductory psychology course: I. Learning and satisfaction in on-line versus lecture courses. Behaviour Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 32, 230–239.

    Google Scholar 

  92. *Maki, W. S., & Maki, R. H. (2002). Multimedia comprehension skill predicts differential outcomes of Web-based and lecture courses. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 8(2), 85–98.

    Google Scholar 

  93. *Maltby, J. R., & Whittle, J. (2000). Learning programming online: Student perceptions and performance. Retrieved April 28, 2003 from http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/coffs00/papers/john_maltby.pdf

  94. *Marttunen, M., & Laurinen, L. (2001). Learning of argumentation skills in networked and face-to-face environments. Instructional Science, 29, 127–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  95. *McCleary, I. D., & Egan, M. W. (1989). Program design and evaluation: Two-way interactive television. The American Journal of Distance Education, 3(1), 50–60.

    Google Scholar 

  96. *Mehlenbacher, B., Miller, C., Convington, D., & Larsen, J. (2000). Active and interactive learning online: A comparison of Web-based and conventional writing classes. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 43(2), 166–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  97. Moore, M. (1989). Three types of interaction. American Journal of Distance Education. 3(2), 1–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  98. Moore, M., & Kearsley, G. (1996). Distance education: A systems view. Toronto: Wadsworth.

    Google Scholar 

  99. Moore, M., & Kearsley, G. (2005). Distance education: A systems view (2nd ed.). Toronto: Wadsworth.

    Google Scholar 

  100. *Murphy, T. H. (2000). An evaluation of a distance education course design for general soils. Journal of Agricultural Education, 41(3), 103–113.

    Google Scholar 

  101. *Nakshabandi, A. A. (1993). A comparative evaluation of a distant education course for female students at King Saud University. International Journal of Instructional Media, 20(2), 127–136.

    Google Scholar 

  102. *Navarro, P., & Shoemaker, J. (1999). Economics in cyberspace: A comparison study. Retrieved April 23, 2003 from http://www.powerofeconomics.com/AJDEFI-NAL.pdf.

  103. *Neuhauser, C. (2002). Learning style and effectiveness of online and face-to-face instruction. American Journal of Distance Education, 16(2), 99–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  104. Nipper, S. (1989). Third generation distance learning and computer conferencing. In: R. Mason and A. Kaye (Eds.), Mindweave: Communication, computers and distance education (pp. 63–73). Oxford, UK: Pergamon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  105. *Parker, D., & Gemino, A. (2001). Inside online learning: Comparing conceptual and technique learning performance in place-based and ALN formats. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks [Online], 5(2), 64–74. Retrieved May 13, 2003 from http://www.aln.org/publications/jaln/v5n2/v5n2_parkergemino.asp.

    Google Scholar 

  106. Phipps, R., & Merisotis, J. (1999). What's the difference? A review of contemporary research on the effectiveness of distance learning in higher education. Washington, DC: The Institute for Higher Education Policy.

    Google Scholar 

  107. *Piccoli, G., Ahmad, R., & Ives, B. (2001). Web-based virtual learning environments: A research framework and a preliminary assessment of effectiveness in basic IT skills training. MIS Quarterly, 25(4), 401–426.

    Google Scholar 

  108. *Pirrong, G. D., & Lathen, W. C. (1990). The use of interactive television in business education. Educational Technology, 30 (May) 49–54.

    Google Scholar 

  109. Resnick, L., Levine, J., & Teasley, S. D. (1993) (Eds.). Perspectives on socially shared cognition. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  110. *Richards, I. E. (1994). Distance learning: A study of computer modem students in a community college. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Kent State University, Kent, OH.

  111. *Richards, I., & others. (1995, April). A study of computer-modem students: A call for action. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.

  112. *Ritchie, H., & Newby, T. J. (1989). Classroom lecture/discussion vs. live televised instruction: A comparison of effects on student performance, attitudes, & interaction. The American Journal of Distance Education, 3(3), 36–45.

    Google Scholar 

  113. *Rivera, J., & Rice, M. (2002). A comparison of student outcomes and satisfaction between traditional and Web based course offerings. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 5(3). Retrieved May 13, 2003 from http://www.westga.edu/dis-tance/ojdla/fall53/rivera53.html.

  114. Robinson, D. H. (2004). An interview with Gene V. Glass. Educational Researcher, 33(3), 26–30.

    Google Scholar 

  115. *Ross, J. L. (2000). An exploratory analysis of post-secondary student achievement comparing a Web-based and a conventional course learning environment. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.

  116. *Ruchti, W. P., & Odell, M. R. L. (2000). Comparison and evaluation of online and classroom instruction in elementary science teaching methods courses. Retrieved April 30, 2003 from http://nova.georgefox.edu/nwcc/arpapers/uidaho.pdf.

  117. *Rudin, J. P. (1998). Teaching undergraduate business management courses on campus and in prisons. Journal of Correctional Education, 49(3), 100–106.

    Google Scholar 

  118. Saba, F. (2000). Research in distance education: A status report. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Education, 1(1), 1–9.

  119. Salomon, G. (1993). Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations. Cambridge, ENG.: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  120. *Sankaran, S. R., & Bui, T. (2001). Impact of learning strategies and motivation on performance: A study in Web-based instruction. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 28(3), 191–198.

    Google Scholar 

  121. *Schoenfeld-Tacher, R., McConnell, S., & Graham, M. (2001). Do no harm—A comparison of the effects of on-line vs. traditional delivery media on a science course. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 10(3), 257–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  122. *Schulman, A. H., & Sims, R. L. (1999). Learning in an online format versus an in-class format: An experimental study. THE Journal Online, 26(11). Retrieved April 30, 2003 from http://www.thejournal.com/magazine/.

  123. *Schutte, J. G. (1997). Virtual teaching in higher education: The new intellectual superhighway or just another traffic jam? Retrieved November, 2000 from http://www.csun.edu/sociology/virexp.htm.

  124. *Scott, M. (1990). A comparison of achievement between college students attending traditional and television course presentations (distance education). Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Auburn University, Auburn, AL.

  125. *Searcy, R. (1993). Grade distribution study: Telecourses vs. traditional courses. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 362 251)

  126. Sedlmeier, P., & Gigerenzer, G. (1989). Do studies of statistical power have an effect on the power of studies? Psychological Bulletin, 105, 309–316

    Article  Google Scholar 

  127. Simonson, M., Schlosser, C., & Hanson, D. (1999). Theory and distance education: A new discussion. American Journal of Distance Education, 13, (1), 60–75.

    Google Scholar 

  128. *Sipusic, M. J., Pannoni, R. L., Smith, R. B., Dutra, J., Gibbons, J. F., & Sutherland, W. R. (1999). Virtual collaborative learning: A comparison between face-to-face tutored video (TVI) and distributed tutored video instruction (DTVI). Palo Alto, CA: Sun Microsystems, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  129. *Smeaton, A. F., & Keogh, G. (1999). An analysis of the use of virtual delivery of undergraduate lectures. Retrieved April 30, 2003 from http://citeseer.nj.nec.com/cache/papers/cs/5005/ http://www.compapp.dcu.ie/asmeaton/pubs/Com-pEd98.pdf/an-analysis-of-the.pdf.

  130. Smith, P. L., & Dillon, C. L. (1999). Comparing distance learning and classroom learning: Conceptual considerations. American Journal of Distance Education, 13, 107–124.

    Google Scholar 

  131. *Smith, T. E. (2001). A comparison of achievement between community college students attending traditional and video course presentations. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Auburn University, Auburn, AL.

  132. *Smith, T. L., Ruocco, A., & Jansen, B. J. (1999). Digital video in education. In Proceedings of the ACM Computer Science Education Conference, 122–126, New Orleans, LA.

  133. *Suter, N. W., & Perry, M. K. (1997, November 12–14). Evaluation by electronic mail. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Mid-South Educational Research Association, Memphis, TN.

  134. Taylor, J. C. (2001). Fifth generation distance education. Keynote address delivered at the ICDE 20th World Conference, Dusseldorf, Germany, 1–5 April. Retrieved July 24, 2001 from http://www.usq.edu.au/users/taylorj/conferences.htm.

  135. *Thirunarayanan, M. O., & Perez-Prado, A. (2001). Comparing Web-based and class-room-based learning: A quantitative study. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 34(2), 131–137.

    Google Scholar 

  136. *Tidewater Community College. (2001). Distance learning report. Norfolk, VA: Tidewater Community College, Office of Institutional Effectiveness.

  137. *Toussaint, D. (1990). Fleximode: Within Western Australia TAFE. Leabrook, Australia: TAFE National Centre for Research and Development, Ltd.(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 333 227)

  138. *Tucker, S. (2001). Distance education: Better, worse or as good as traditional education? Retrieved April 30, 2003 from http://www.westga.edu/distance/ojdla/winter44/tucker44.html

  139. Ullmer, E. J. (1994). Media and learning: Are there two kinds of truth? Educational Technology Research & Development, 42 (1), 21–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  140. *Waldmann, E., & De Lange, P. (1996). Performance of business undergraduates studying through open learning: A comparative analysis. Accounting Education, 5(1), 25–33.

    Google Scholar 

  141. *Wallace, L. F., & Radjenovic, D. (1996). Remote training for school teachers of children with diabetes mellitus. Retrieved September 13, 2001 from http://www.unb.ca/naweb/proceedings/1996/zwallace.html.

  142. *Wallace, P. E., & Clariana, R. B. (2000). Achievement predictors for a computer-appli-cations module delivered online. Journal of Information Systems Education, 11(1/2), 13–18. Retrieved May 15, 2003 from http://gise.org/JISE/Vol11/v11n1-2p13-18.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  143. *Wang, A. Y., & Newlin, M. H. (2000). Characteristics of students who enroll and succeed in psychology Web-based classes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(1), 137–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  144. What Works Clearinghouse. (2002). WWW evidence standards. Retrieved January 25, 2004 from http://www.whatworks.ed.gov/reviewprocess/standards.html.

  145. *Wideman, H. H., & Owston, R. D. (1999). Internet based courses at Atkinson College: An initial assessment. Retrieved May 13, 2003 from http://www.yorku.ca/irlt/reports/techreport99-1.htm.

  146. *Winn, F. J., Fletcher, D., Smith, J., Williams, R., & Louis, T. (1999). Internet teaching of PA practitioners in rural areas: Can complex material with high definition graphics be taught using PC. In. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 43rd Annual Meeting.

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yiping Lou.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lou, Y., Bernard, R.M. & Abrami, P.C. Media and Pedagogy in Undergraduate Distance Education: A Theory-Based Meta-Analysis of Empirical Literature. EDUCATION TECH RESEARCH DEV 54, 141–176 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-006-8252-x

Download citation

Keywords

  • distance education
  • technology-mediated learning
  • meta-analysis