What Makes Good Online Instruction Good?: New Opportunities and Old Barriers
This book is about changes in learning and instruction and implications for learners, teachers, designers and policy makers. Many of the relevant changes are related to new technologies and developing views of how, when, where and why people manage to learn different kinds of things more or less effectively. This chapter focuses on distance learning technologies and questions pertaining to the evaluation of a particular kind of distance learning—online instruction. Criteria that appear relevant to assessing effectiveness are presented and discussed. Arguments for and against online instruction being held to different quality standards are presented. The chapter concludes with remarks about the personalities of online learning groups and how these might affect learning outcomes.
KeywordsOnline Learning Student Evaluation Online Instruction School Engagement Blended Learning
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Boekarts, M., Pintrich, P. R., & Zeidner, M. (Eds.) (2000). Handbook of self-regulation: Theory, research and applications. San Diego, CA: Academic.Google Scholar
- Boone, W., & Butler Kahle, J. (1998). Student perceptions of instruction, peer interest, and adult support for middle school science: Differences by race and gender. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 4, 333–340.Google Scholar
- Bouwsma, O. K. (1975). Unpublished seminar notes. Austin, TX: University of Texas.Google Scholar
- Eliot, T. S. (1934). The rock. London: Faber & Faber.Google Scholar
- Ericsson, K. A. (2004). Deliberate practice and the acquisition and maintenance of expert performance in medicine and related domains. Academic Medicine, 10, S1–S12.Google Scholar
- Ganesan, R. (2004, July). Perceptions and practices of expert teachers in Technology-based distance and distributed learning environments. Unpublished dissertation. Syracuse, NY: School of Education, Syracuse University.Google Scholar
- Gould, S. J. (1989). Wonderful life: The Burgess Shale and the nature of history. New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar
- Hadfield, J. (1992). Classroom dynamics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1991). Learning together and alone: Cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
- Klein, J. D., Spector, J. M., Grabowski, B., & de la Teja, I. (2004). Instructor competencies: Standards for face-to-face, online and blended settings. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
- Learning Development Institute (2005). Presidential workshop and panel session on learners in a changing learning landscape: Questions formulated by participating members. Retrieved September 7, 2007, from http://www.learndev.org/ibstpi-AECT2005. html#anchor1672398.
- Lowman, J. (1995). Mastering the techniques of teaching (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
- Richey, R. C., Fields, D. C., & Foxon, M. with Roberts, R. C., Spannaus, T., & Spector, J. M. (2001). Instructional design competencies: The standards (3rd ed.). Syracuse, NY: ERIC Clearinghouse on Information and Technology.Google Scholar
- Sagan, C. (1980). Cosmos. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
- Scriven, M. (1995). Student ratings offer useful input to teacher evaluations. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 4(7). Retrieved March 6, 2006, from http://PAREonline.net/getvn.asp?v = 4&n = 7.
- Slavin, R. E. (1998). Effects of student teams and peer tutoring on academic achievement and time on task. Journal of experimental education, 48, 253–257.Google Scholar
- Spector, J. M. (2000). Trends and issues in educational technology: How far we have not come. Update Semiannual Bulletin, 21(2). Published by the ERIC Clearinghouse on Information &Technology, Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY. Retrieved on April 4, 2006, from http://suedweb.syr.edu/faculty/spector/publications/trends-tech-educ-eric.pdf.
- Spector, J. M. (2001). An overview of progress and problems in educational technology. Interactive Educational Multimedia, 3, 27–37.Google Scholar
- Spector, J. M., & De la Teja, I. (2001, December). Competencies for online teaching. ERIC Digest EDO-IR-2001–09. Syracuse, NY: ERIC Information Technology Clearinghouse. Retrieved March 5, 2006, from http://www.eric.ed.gov/.
- Spector, J. M., & Koszalka, T. A. (2004). The DEEP methodology for assessing learning in complex domains (Final report to the National Science Foundation Evaluative Research and Evaluation Capacity Building). Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University.Google Scholar
- Spector, J. M., Doughty, P. L., & Yonai, B. A. (2003). Cost and learning effects of alternative e-collaboration methods in online settings (Final report for the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation Cost Effective Use of Technology in Teaching Initiative). Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University.Google Scholar
- Storrings, D. A. (2005). Attrition in distance education: A meta-analysis. Unpublished dissertation. Syracuse, NY: School of Education, Syracuse University.Google Scholar
- Wilson, R. (1998, January). New research casts doubt on value of student evaluations of professors. Chronicle of Higher Education, Jan. 16, 1998, A12.Google Scholar