Impacts of Online Education on Existing Education Models: Empirical Evidence from Taiwan

  • Jonathan Spangler
Part of the Education in the Asia-Pacific Region: Issues, Concerns and Prospects book series (EDAP, volume 31)


Recent years have seen an explosion in the popularity of online education, yet the impacts of online education on existing education models, teachers, and students are not fully understood. While the rise of online education is evident in countries around the world, students in East Asian societies have been particularly active in their online educational pursuits. This chapter seeks to further understand the significance of these trends by using empirical evidence from a nationwide survey conducted in collaboration with the Election Study Center in Taiwan. In particular, it aims to identify the impacts of online education on the existing education model, teachers, and students. The results indicated that online education has had major impacts on the existing education model. It was seen as more Western, active, top-down, and focused on knowledge acquisition than offline education, which suggests that offline education represents a significant departure from the approaches to teaching and learning that locals have come to expect. The perceived impacts on teachers included an encouragement of teaching quality improvement and lessened the overall burden. As for students, the perceived impacts have been mostly positive, with respondents viewing online education as encouraging independent learning, providing more opportunities to be critical of teachers, and not necessarily discouraging creativity or asking questions. Respondents also suggested that online education supplemented the breadth, depth, and richness of educational opportunities, suggesting that some respondents viewed local educational opportunities as inadequate. Detrimental impacts on students included decreased opportunities for face-to-face interaction with peers and teachers as well as mentions of assessment problems and student apathy.


Online Learning Distance Education Nationwide Survey Online Education Education Model 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



Many people have generously contributed their time and effort to making this chapter a reality. In particular, the author would like to thank Chuing Prudence Chou for her assistance with coordination and providing opportunities for networking and feedback from others in the international educational research community, the Election Study Center at National Chengchi University for conducting the survey, the expert reviewers and pre-testers at National Chengchi University and Academia Sinica for their comments on earlier versions of the questionnaire, the participants at the 2nd Conference of the Higher Education Research Association (HERA) at Seoul National University for their feedback on the study, and the survey respondents who took the time to complete the questionnaire.


  1. Adkins, S. S. (2011). The worldwide market for mobile learning products and services: 2010–2015 forecast and analysis. Ambient Insight. Accessed 25 Sept 2014.
  2. Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2012). Conflicted: Faculty and online education, 2012. Babson Survey Research Group. Accessed 10 Oct 2014.
  3. Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2014). Grade change: Tracking online education in the United States. Oakland: Babson Survey Research Group. Accessed 3 Oct 2014.
  4. Chen, H. R., & Tseng, H. F. (2012). Factors that influence acceptance of web-based e-learning systems for the in-service education of junior high school teachers in Taiwan. Evaluation and Program Planning, 35(3), 398–406. doi: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2011.11.007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chen, P. S. D., Lambert, A. D., & Guidry, K. R. (2010). Engaging online learners: The impact of Web-based learning technology on college student engagement. Computers & Education, 54(4), 1222–1232. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2009.11.008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chen, L. Y., Hsiao, B., Chern, C. C., & Chen, H. G. (2014). Affective mechanisms linking Internet use to learning performance in high school students: A moderated mediation study. Computers in Human Behavior, 35, 431–443. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2014.03.025.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cheng, S.-F. (1996). Summary of National Chengchi University Election Study Center. Survey Research: Method and Application, 1, 205–212. Accessed 29 Sept 2014. [鄭夙芬. (1996). 國立政治大學選舉研究中心簡介. 調查研究-方法與應用, (1), 205–212.]
  8. Chou, C. P., & Ching, G. (2012). Taiwan education at the crossroad: When globalization meets localization. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. doi: 10.1057/9780230120143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Coursera. (2014). Coursera cup leaderboard standings. Accessed 20 Aug 2014.
  10. Executive Yuan, ROC. (2013). The Republic of China yearbook 2013. Accessed 8 Nov 2014.
  11. Farrell, G. M. (Ed.). (1999). The development of virtual education: A global perspective. Vancouver: The Commonwealth of Learning. Accessed September 29, 2014.Google Scholar
  12. Jung, I. (2001). Issues and challenges of providing online inservice teacher training: Korea’s experience. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 2(1), 1–18. Accessed 29 Sept 2014.Google Scholar
  13. Kong, S. C., Chan, T. W., Huang, R., & Cheah, H. M. (2014). A review of e-learning policy in school education in Singapore, Hong Kong, Taiwan, and Beijing: Implications to future policy planning. Journal of Computers in Education, 1, 1–26. doi: 10.1007/s40692-014-0011-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kuo, Y. C., Walker, A. E., Belland, B. R., & Schroder, K. E. (2013). A predictive study of student satisfaction in online education programs. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 14(1), 16–39. Accessed 24 Nov 2014.Google Scholar
  15. Lee, J. W. (2010). Online support service quality, online learning acceptance, and student satisfaction. The Internet and Higher Education, 13(4), 277–283. doi: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2010.08.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M., & Jones, K. (2009). Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning: A meta-analysis and review of online learning studies. U.S. Department of Education. Accessed 10 Oct 2014.
  17. Moore, M. G., & Kearsley, G. (2012). Distance education: A systems view of online learning. Belmont: Wadsworth/Cengage Learning.Google Scholar
  18. Ngram Viewer. (2014). Phrases: Distance learning, distance education, online learning, online education, online course between 1970 and 2008. Google Books. Accessed 29 Sept 2014.
  19. Rosenberg, M. J. (2001). E-learning: Strategies for delivering knowledge in the digital age. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  20. Seaman, J. (2009). Online learning as a strategic asset. Vol. II: The paradox of faculty voices: Views and experiences with online learning. Washington, DC: Association of Public and Land-grant Universities. Accessed 24 Nov 2014.Google Scholar
  21. Sparapani, E. F., Perez, D. C., Gould, J., Hillman, S., & Clark, L. (2014). A global curriculum? Understanding teaching and learning in the United States, Taiwan, India, and Mexico. SAGE Open, 4(2), 1–15. doi: 10.1177/2158244014536406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. United States Department of Education [DoED]. (2010). National education technology plan 2010. Office of Educational Technology. Accessed 30 Sept 2014.
  23. Vonderwell, S. (2003). An examination of asynchronous communication experiences and perspectives of students in an online course: A case study. The Internet and Higher Education, 6(1), 77–90. doi: 10.1016/S1096-7516(02)00164-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Wallace, R. M. (2003). Online learning in higher education: A review of research on interactions among teachers and students. Education, Communication & Information, 3(2), 241–280. doi: 10.1080/14636310303143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Wang, C. M., & Reeves, T. (2004). Cultural considerations in online education: A review of the literature. In World conference on e-learning in corporate, government, healthcare, and higher education (Vol. 2004, No. 1, pp. 2460–2465).Google Scholar
  26. Wu, H. K., Hsu, Y. S., & Hwang, F. K. (2008). Factors affecting teachers’ adoption of technology in classrooms: Does school size matter? International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 6(1), 63–85. doi: 10.1007/s10763-006-9061-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Singapore 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.International Doctoral Program in Asia-Pacific StudiesNational Chengchi UniversityTaipeiTaiwan

Personalised recommendations