The Internet-Based

Education Bandwagon:

Look Before
You Leap
O
nline education is the latest tech-
nique in the long history of dis-
tance education. There is a
considerable body of literature
discussing the performance of stu-
dents undertaking distance educa-
tion courses as compared to traditional classroom
courses [1, 9]. In general these studies suggest there
is no significant difference in achievement and satis-
faction between students in distance education
classes and traditional modes of delivery. But what
happens when distance education embraces Internet
delivery? Do the findings change?
Recent studies of student perceptions of online
education (1–4, 6–8] point to a number of benefits:
convenience and flexibility, greater motivation to
work, better understanding of the course material,
more and better learning, higher quality of education,
better access to and communication with the profes-
sor, more student communication, more active par-
ticipation in discussion, and immediate and extensive
Online students
may perform as well as those
in traditional classrooms,
but what about the quality of
their learning experience?
feedback. But the same studies also note numerous
disadvantages: high frustration levels, lower levels of
satisfaction and interest, technical and logistical prob-
lems, lack of instructor interaction, difficulty devel-
oping student friendships, more attendance lapses,
lack of feedback, confusion about class requirements,
and the overwhelming volume of email and online
discussion.
There are other issues as well. Academics [1, 2, 5,
10] question the suitability of certain courses being
online; the time taken to prepare and maintain such

By Rudy Hirschheim

COMMUNICATIONS OF THE ACM July 2005/Vol. 48, No. 7 97

courses; the difficulty in motivating students; the
greater student demands associated with online
classes; intellectual property concerns; and the poten-
tial conflict inherent in administrations insisting that
such courses be inexpensive, while of high quality.
A
n apparent belief exists that any dis-
tance education delivery mode,
including the Internet, will have lit-
tle impact on the performance of
students as measured by their
grades. But even if student perfor-
mance is unaffected, does that mean the quality of the
learning experience is also unaffected? The fact is,
most studies that surveyed student opinion on the
effects of Internet courses have only used closed ques-
tion, written questionnaires. Few studies have sought
in-depth information from students, regarding not
only their opinions on different aspects of online
learning, but why they hold those views. This
research collected such in-depth views of students on
the impact of Internet delivery on their learning expe-
rience. It also compared student grades with those in
a similar class given by the same professor. The par-
ticular course analyzed was the core MIS class taken
by all MBA students.
A questionnaire survey was administered at the end
of the semester when the students had completed all
class requirements, assignments, and exams. Students
from both the Internet and traditional class were
included in the survey. In order to obtain detailed, in-
depth responses to the survey questions, a telephone
interview consisting of numerous follow-up questions
was the primary survey tool. If students noted liking
or disliking various elements of the course, for exam-
ple, they were always asked to elaborate on why they
felt this way.
An attempt was made to contact all 77 students of
the combined classes. Telephone interviews, ranging
from 30 to 45 minutes, were held with 33 students
within a month of the end of the semester. An email
version of the survey was sent to all students who did
not respond to the telephone survey. The email sur-
vey was issued two months after the semester, and a
further attempt was made three months later to
include those students who still had not responded.
The students were asked 26 questions. In addition to
the 33 telephone interviews, 18 email questionnaires
were completed and returned. Overall, this comprised
a total of 51 student responses out of a combined class
number of 77: a response rate of 66%. The results
include 28 interviews from the Internet class of 40
students (70% response rate) and 23 interviews from
the traditional class of 37 students (62% response
98 July 2005/Vol. 48, No. 7 COMMUNICATIONS OF THE ACM
rate). The survey data from both the traditional and
Internet classes (telephone and email versions) was
combined and compared on a question-by-question
basis for all 26 questions.
RESULTS
Convenience and communication. The key advantage
of the Internet to students in the Internet class was
convenience and flexibility. These reasons com-
prised 76% of all the advantages listed by the stu-
dents. The reasons given related to saving time (by
not having to attend or travel to class) and schedule
flexibility (being able to fit their study program into
their busy work, home, or study schedule).
The Internet is essentially a means of communica-
tion and hence it comes as no surprise that the Inter-
net is very popular among the students as a means of
receiving and providing information. It is an ideal
tool for professors to distribute information and for
students to submit questions and assignments. Stu-
dents are increasingly expecting to receive informa-
tion in this manner for their classes.
Loss of educational value. A critical survey finding
was that 74% of students in the Internet class believed
they “missed out” educationally because they took an
Internet class. Clearly the Internet delivers conve-
nience and flexibility, but the students believe they are
receiving a lower level of education.
What is most interesting is that the grades the
students received do not reflect these views. In fact
the results from the two classes are virtually the
same. The average final grade in both classes was
74%. So the key question arising from this study is:
what is the educational value students perceive they
have missed out on by taking an Internet class?
Whatever this value is, it is not reflected in their
grades. The answer to this question appears to lie in
the changed learning experience. Students miss the
lectures, discussion, questions, assignments, group
work, and the professor’s views and perspectives—all
part of traditional classes.
Professor’s input. Traditionally, the professor in a
classroom provides a considerable amount of infor-
mation based on his perspective of a topic. This
allows a student to quickly understand which issues
the professor considers important. Students use this
understanding in their reading and assignments to
cull key information quickly. Students in both classes
noted they received significantly more information
on the professor’s perspective in traditional classes
than in Internet classes. Spontaneity is also an ele-
ment of a lecture situation that is lost in the online
format.
The perception that Internet learning is self-learn-
ing raises the interesting issue of pricing of Internet
courses. If students do not have the same level of
access to a professor, if they are not using a physical
building or the library or other university resources,
they may expect to pay less for these courses although
in reality, offering Internet courses is not necessarily
less costly for the university. No doubt students learn
from doing the readings and assignments without
external influence but they may sense no added value
in solitary study, as the online education model
necessitates.
T
he lecturing skill of the professor is a
strong influencing factor in this dis-
cussion. If students judge a particular
professor as interesting and entertain-
ing, with a good understanding of the
field and much real-world experience
to convey, they may interpret an Internet course as
more of a loss. On the other hand, if a professor does
not come across well in lectures, an Internet delivery
format may be preferred. Of course this presupposes
that a student (or a faculty administrator) knows in
advance whether a professor possesses good teaching
and communication skills. One could imagine the
unpleasant scenario where professors who were
assigned Internet courses felt that this intimated they
were not good teachers.
Class questions and discussion. Most professors
teaching traditional courses encourage questions and
discussion. Internet course professors also attempt to
encourage questions and discussion using Internet
technology. Nevertheless, a majority of students said
they were more likely to ask questions in a classroom
than on the Internet. When one analyzes the types of
questions/discussion enabled via the Internet, it is
clear that many questions were typically about assign-
ment requirements and deadlines rather than topics
under discussion. So the reality is that students are
more likely to ask questions in class. The two main
reasons given were that the lecture leads them to think
of questions, and that they prefer receiving an imme-
diate response. The lecture and the interaction inspire
questions. It is difficult for students reading at home
to maintain the same level of interest.
Questions in a classroom often arise because a stu-
dent does not understand a particular section of the
material. The professor is then given the opportunity to
present the material using an example, a story, or just
more detail. This leads to the same material being pre-
sented in different ways, which is important as people
learn in different ways. Likewise, the flow of questions
in a class allows a professor to adapt content and pace to
the rate at which the students understand the material.
If it is important to a
company to hire new graduates
who are capable and have
experience working in groups,
companies are advised
then
to examine the percentage
of Internet courses that
potential hires have
completed.
The group experience. Several students expressed
surprise that they had to do group work given that
this was an Internet class. They perceived an Internet
class as one they completed at home within their own
timeframe and schedule. This view came as a surprise.
Only the lecture component of the course varied
between the Internet and traditional classes. However,
this variation created a wider cultural gap among the
students. Internet classes imply convenience and
working from home. It is not just the replacement of
one component, it is a whole new means of study. Its
students are independent and solitary.
The implication is that Internet delivery will lead
students to focus on individual effort. Is it okay to let
group work disappear as Internet students may
expect? A key result is the recognition that the Inter-
net is a tool and in some senses it has the potential to
isolate students as much as it potentially brings them
together. If it is important to a company to hire new
graduates who are capable and have experience work-
ing in groups, then companies are advised to examine
the percentage of Internet courses that potential hires
have completed.
DISCUSSION
Cost. Internet delivery offers the promise of provid-
ing large cost saving to employers in delivering com-
pany-based training. However, there may be some
limits. Trainers and educators can only handle a lim-
ited amount of class information and interaction.
With email access, students now expect a professor
to be available 24 hours a day. Students are seeing
Internet classes as an individualistic enterprise, and
their attitude extends to their relationship with the
professor. Many students said they did not read Inter-
net postings prior to sending email. As a consequence,
professors receive the same question from many stu-
COMMUNICATIONS OF THE ACM July 2005/Vol. 48, No. 7 99

The Internet is lauded for
its open access and infinite
variety, but when combined with
education, will the result be
more choice or less
choice?
dents requiring multiple responses, whereas in class
there would be one reply to the whole class. Students
in Internet classes now expect to receive individual
attention in this manner to replace the class relation-
ship. The volume of student-to-professor interaction
may become much higher than in a traditional class
and difficult for a professor to handle. It cannot be
assumed that Internet teaching will allow unlimited
enrollment expansion, in fact the capacity of a profes-
sor to deal with certain volumes of students will likely
be the limiting factor. A related consequence is that a
professors’ productivity may in fact fall. Also, in con-
trast to the expectations of some administrators, costs
associated with Internet delivery may increase.
Restructuring courses. Clearly, courses must be
restructured to take advantage of the new mode of
delivery. There must be a significant change in how
courses are presented and course materials selected.
What works in the traditional class is not always as
effective online as evidenced by several findings from
this survey.
The elements of traditional university instruction
affected in some way by online delivery, as identified
by the study participants, were:
• Loss of lectures;
• Loss of information delivered in visual and verbal
formats;
• Loss of a professor’s views and perspectives;
• Loss of classroom discussion;
• Different type of access and relationship to the
professor;
• Loss of questions on course content;
• Easier access to administrative information;
• Increased level of group problems;
• An expectation that course work should be
individual in nature, not group based;
100 July 2005/Vol. 48, No. 7 COMMUNICATIONS OF THE ACM
• Expectation that all reading materials be online;
• Higher level of self-sufficient learning; and
• Changes in student motivation.
C
an these elements be changed or
replaced by others that are more
suited to the Internet and achieve
the same purpose or educational
outcome? But first and more impor-
tantly, it is necessary to ask: Are each
of these elements important to the educational qual-
ity, experience, or outcome? For example, how
important are student questions regarding the
course material? Does it matter if students are not
inspired to ask questions? Is group work important?
Once the importance of the various instructional
elements is decided, it is time to attempt to adapt
courses to take advantage of Internet delivery.
Choice versus standardization. Having redesigned
courses to suit Internet delivery, what will the new
courses look like? Certain traditional elements appear
to be difficult to create in an online environment. If
courses are redesigned around what works on the
Internet, will the long-term effect be a movement
toward more choice or a standardized product? The
world is increasingly using one word processing pack-
age and one version of English grammar as defined by
Microsoft, so will we be moving to one standard for-
mat for an MBA course? The Internet is lauded for its
open access and infinite variety, but when combined
with education, will the result be more choice or less
choice?
Students will have access to a greater choice of sub-
ject offerings from a greater variety of universities.
The medium could provide opportunities to tailor
courses based on competencies of individuals or par-
ticular groups of students (and/or professors). But an
alternative scenario is that open-structured courses—
ones where students must access a range of resources
or leave their computer to analyze real-world situa-
tions—may no longer exist. If universities follow stu-
dent demand, courses may be focused on individual
work rather than group projects, online resources,
and tightly structured around textbooks and limited
materials. The result would be a more standard prod-
uct suitable for delivery to a mass market. If these
trends become reality, it would appear the medium,
not educational goals, may be determining the con-
tent and format of education. Is this what we really
want?
Grades and the Internet. Students come to a univer-
sity to learn new skills. A university provides a formal
process of education: it is a vehicle by which skills and
knowledge are transferred to students. Students
undertake courses, which are an academic and admin-
istrative division of skills and knowledge. The grades
obtained by students are supposedly an indicator of
how well a student is progressing in obtaining specific
skills and knowledge. The end goal for the student is
a degree that indicates completion of the transfer of
knowledge. Courses and grades are the means to that
end. However, it can be argued that the focus on
grades has become an end in itself. Concentration on
grades has resulted in a loss of focus on skills and the
learning process.
So what is the impact of Internet delivery on the
issue of grades? The best Internet courses, as judged
by the students, are those that are tightly structured
around one textbook and have no group work. Stu-
dents choose Internet classes for convenience and
likely see it as a means of obtaining their grades more
easily. More worrisome is the expectation among
many students that they should be able to earn a top
grade almost irrespective of effort and ability. If the
Internet leads to a more standardized, minimalist
product targeted for a mass market, this will further
“box in” and “dumb down” education, resulting in a
system that does not support the endeavors of supe-
rior scholars and thinkers.
C ONCLUSION
Loss of educational quality as a result of Internet
delivery is the major concern identified in this sur-
vey. The Internet is leading to a fundamental change
in the manner in which students are learning and
retaining knowledge. The new delivery mode is
pushing change, and universities must consider if
they are happy with the direction being taken. A
total Internet solution will lead to the loss of certain
educational experiences and the importance of these
experiences and learning methods must be judged,
trade-offs made, and new directions undertaken in
course delivery. While students taking Internet
courses get the same degree and grades similar to
those taking the course in a classroom, they also
want a more interesting mix of Internet and tradi-
tional elements within the same course; their educa-
tional issues addressed; group work reevaluated,
mostly individual tasks; more tightly structured
courses, with all teaching materials delivered online;
and a new relationship with the professor.
There are also opportunities for developing new
and interesting products. In some courses, students
may have a mixture of lecture and online work, while
others are totally group-oriented—depending on the
educational objective. A professor who wishes to lec-
ture may complete the lecturing component of several
courses and a professor who enjoys online work may
develop innovative online courses, and external staff
may be paid to do the specialized or tedious aspects of
the process. It is likely that courses and programs will
become more and more modularized to handle these
different needs. Courses themselves will likely evolve
to include a judicious mixture of Internet and lecture
content.
Thus, not all professors need to lecture; not all pro-
fessors need to be online; and not all courses need to
have a group project. Perhaps the Internet age will
usher in a new era of mass customization, a portfolio
of educational opportunities and experiences for stu-
dents, increased specialization, and new opportunities
for professors. Such alternatives will pose challenges
for universities, but at the same time, offer opportu-
nities that universities can ill afford to ignore. c
Rudy Hirschheim (rudy@lsu.edu) is the Ourso Family
Distinguished Professor of Information Systems, in the E.J.Ourso
College of Business, Louisiana State University.
Contributing to this article were Kim White and Geoffrey Dick.
References
1. Hara, N. and Kling, R. Students' frustrations with a Web-based dis-
tance education course: A taboo topic in the discourse. First Monday 4,
12 (Dec. 1999).
2. Hiltz, S.R. Impacts of college-level courses via asynchronous learning
networks: Some preliminary results. Journal of Asynchronous Learning
Networks (1997).
3. Hornby, P. and Anderson, M. Putting the student in the driver's seat:
A learner centered, self-paced, computer managed, introductory psy-
chology course. Journal of Educational Technology Systems 24, 2 (1995),
173–179.
4. Pear, J. and Novak, M. Computer-aided personalized system of instruc-
tion: A program evaluation. Computers in Teaching 23, 2 (1996),
119–123.
5. Piccoli, G., Ahmad, R. and Ives, B. Web-based virtual learning envi-
ronments: A research framework and a preliminary assessment of effec-
tiveness in basic it skills training. MIS Quarterly 25, 4 (2001), 293–313.
6. Sloane, A. Learning with the Web: Experience of using the World
Wide Web in a learning environment. Computers and Education 28, 4
(1997), 207–212.
7. Smith, G., Ferguson, D., and Carts, M. Teaching college courses online
vs. Face-to-face. The Journal Online (2002).
8. Spooner, F., Jordaon, L., Algozzine, B., and Spooner, M. Student rat-
ings of instruction in distance learning and on-campus learning. The
Journal of Educational Research 92, 3 (1999), 132–140.
9. Storck, J. and Sproull, L. Though a glass darkly, what do people learn
in videoconferences. Human Communication Research 22, 2 (1995),
197–219.
10. Ward, M. and Newlands, D. Use of the Web in undergraduate teach-
ing. Computers and Education 31 (1998), 171–184.
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or
classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed
for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation
on the first page. To copy otherwise, to republish, to post on servers or to redistribute
to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee.
© 2005 ACM 0002-0782/05/0700 $5.00
COMMUNICATIONS OF THE ACM July 2005/Vol. 48, No. 7 101