Journal of Global Information Technology Management

ISSN: 1097-198X (Print) 2333-6846 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ugit20

Online Education: Worldwide Status, Challenges,

Trends, and Implications

Shailendra Palvia, Prageet Aeron, Parul Gupta, Diptiranjan Mahapatra, Ratri

Parida, Rebecca Rosner & Sumita Sindhi

To cite this article: Shailendra Palvia, Prageet Aeron, Parul Gupta, Diptiranjan Mahapatra,
Ratri Parida, Rebecca Rosner & Sumita Sindhi (2018) Online Education: Worldwide Status,
Challenges, Trends, and Implications, Journal of Global Information Technology Management,
21:4, 233-241, DOI: 10.1080/1097198X.2018.1542262

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/1097198X.2018.1542262

Published online: 26 Nov 2018.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 145345

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Citing articles: 242 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=ugit20
JOURNAL OF GLOBAL INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT
2018, VOL. 21, NO. 4, 233–241
https://doi.org/10.1080/1097198X.2018.1542262

Online Education: Worldwide Status, Challenges, Trends, and

Implications
Shailendra Palviaa, Prageet Aeronb, Parul Guptab, Diptiranjan Mahapatrac, Ratri Paridac,
Rebecca Rosnera, and Sumita Sindhic
a
College of Management, Long Island University Post, Brookville, NY, USA; bManagement Development Institute
Gurgaon, Gurgaon, India; cIndian Institute of Management Sambalpur, Gurgaon, Odisha, India

ABSTRACT KEYWORDS
Online education in its various modes has been growing steadily worldwide Online education; distance
due to the confluence of new technologies, global adoption of the Internet, education; flipped/blended
and intensifying demand for a workforce trained periodically for the ever- education; correspondence
evolving digital economy. Online education is on track to become main- courses; synchronous/
stream by 2025. This editorial documents country-level factors that impact asynchronous learning;
learning management
quantity and quality of online education. Such factors include industry systems; MOOCs
(business); governments at local, state, and federal levels; country laws;
ICT capacity; Internet/mobile technology diffusion; and income and digital
divide. We provide implications for country and world organizations con-
cerning online education.

Introduction
The ubiquity of information technology has been influencing almost all aspects of our lives: the way we
work, interact with others, process data into information, analyze and share information, entertain
ourselves, and enjoy tourism. E-evolution or e-revolution (Palvia, 2013) has witnessed e-mails, e-com-
merce, e-government, and now e-education. E-education or online education is changing the way we
approach teaching and learning. Changes in education delivery models have been rapid and transfor-
mational. As institutions worldwide adapt to these changes, a very dynamic education landscape has
generated immense interest among researchers, educators, administrators, policymakers, publishers,
and businesses. Instead of “correspondence” courses that started in England in the mid-nineteenth
century and involved sending of hard copy documents that were subject to long time delays, e-educa-
tion facilitates asynchronous as well as synchronous education delivery methods along with access to
online discussion boards, chat rooms, and video conferencing. Today’s “online” or “blended” learning
started in the 1990s with the advent of the Internet and World Wide Web and reaches individuals in
remote locations, or who want the convenience of eliminating travel time.
As information and communication technologies have kept advancing, online education has become
more feasible technologically, economically, and operationally. Incentives for universities to offer online
programs include financial constraints and rewards (e.g. reduced infrastructure for classrooms, offices,
cafeterias, dorms, and libraries), increase in nontraditional students that are working full time, and the
advanced state of technology making it easy to implement. Dziuban, Picciano, Graham, and Moskal
(2016) describe the evolution of online education in four phases using primarily USA context: 1990s
(Internet propelled distance education), 2000–2007 (increasing use of Learning Management Systems –
LMS), 2008–2012 (growth of Massive Open Online Courses – MOOCs), and beyond with growth of
online higher education enrollments outpacing traditional higher education enrollments.

CONTACT Dr. Shailendra Palvia Shailendra.Palvia@liu.edu College of Management, Long Island University Post,
Brookville, NY, USA
This editorial has been republished with minor changes. These changes do not impact the academic content of the editorial.
© 2018 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
234 S. PALVIA ET AL.

This rich and diverse history of online education has produced a substantial body of research,
examining different aspects of online education. Many conferences and journals have had themes
and special issues focusing on online education. Research related to online business education was
first initiated in 1990s by Information Systems (IS) researchers like Alavi and Leidner (2001)
focusing on technology-mediated learning (Alavi, 1994; Alavi & Leidner, 2001) and over the years
there has been increasing interest in online business education research.
This essay is both timely and significant for several reasons. First, it focuses on the analysis of
online business education. Second, it covers period from 2000 till date. Third, since our emphasis is
on business education, we have analyzed several business journals’ articles that focus mostly on
online education. Fourth, it is a global study and provides a broader perspective of the state of online
education in business from five regions of the world – North America, Europe, South America, Asia,
Asia-Pacific, and Africa.
We use the holistic model by Palvia, Kumar, Kumar, and Kumar (2017) as a backdrop to analyze
the status of online education in different parts of the world with a focus only on country-level
factors. The holistic model delineates global; country, institutional; curriculum/program; and micro-
level factor of student, professor, course, and technology interactions. Global-level factors determine
reach of online education beyond national borders. Globalization of online education can happen
only if there are standard technology platforms (like Internet), bridging of digital divide, accom-
modation of diverse languages and cultures, standard curriculum, and evaluation processes.
Country-level factors include industry (business) and governments at local, state, and federal
levels. Industry and government sectors determine employability of graduates from online programs.
Also, local and state governments make regulations in regard to all educational programs, and
initiatives include online education. Country factors also include laws, Information and
Communication Technology (ICT) capacity, Internet/mobile technology diffusion, income divide,
and digital divide. Institutional factors include support from administration, marketing, technology,
and top management; institutional culture (entrepreneurial, hierarchical etc.), selective versus non-
selective institution, public versus private, for profit versus not for profit. Curricular/program factor
includes education level (freshman, sophomore, junior, senior, graduate), part time or full time,
normal or executive program, online mode (blended, flipped, fully online, also degree of synchro-
nous/asynchronous). At the micro-level, student factor includes motivation, culture, learning style,
and IT skill level; professor factor includes (but not limited to) role (moving from “sage on the stage”
to “cyber guide on the side”), teaching mode (cognitive, affective, managerial) and IT skill level;
course factor includes discipline, learning outcomes using perhaps Bloom’s well-known taxonomy;
and technology factor includes platform (LMS type) used, perceived usefulness, and perceived ease
of use.
For this editorial, we focus on country factors that are likely to determine success of online education.
In the beginning, we provide historical perspective about evolution of online education primarily in the
US context. Then, we provide details about the most powerful and longest lasting democracy United
States of America and most the populous and vibrant democracy India. Between these two countries, we
cover about 1.6 billion people that amount to about 22% of the world population. Beyond that, we have
covered Australia, South Africa, China, and Middle East region to get a sense of online/blended
education movement in the world. To the extent possible, for each country/region, we have covered
historical background, current status, challenges, and future prospects.

Evolution of Online Education

Distance learning in the United States has evolved over the last three centuries into what is currently
referred to as “online learning”, via key delivery systems that reflect he tools available at the time: the
postal system; radio and television; and interactive technologies (Anderson & Dron, 2011; Kentnor,
2015). In 1728, an advertisement in the Boston Gazette, which read “Persons in the Country desirous to
learn this art may by having the several lessons sent weekly to them, be as perfectly instructed as those
 JOURNAL OF GLOBAL INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT 235

that live in Boston,” featured Caleb Phillipps, proposing to teach shorthand1 to students via exchanging
letters all throughout the country (Gensler, 2014). Not unlike today’s educators, he asserted that the level
of instruction would be just as good as traditional face-to-face instructions. Radio and television course
delivery systems followed parcel post with a federally licensed radio station launched in 1919, by
a University of Wisconsin professor and collaboration by universities with television stations in the
1950s to offer college courses for credit. The University of Phoenix, known today for its fully online
programs, began to use online technology with CompuServe (the first online service provider) in 1989,
and then the World Wide Web in 1991. The year 1998 marked the beginning of a rise in online
programs, when New York University unveiled NYU Online, which along with many of the other online
programs that followed but did not survive. This initial failure of online programs to meet expectations
also led to the concept of “blended” or “hybrid” programs that surfaced in 1999/2000 and combined
face-to-face classes with online classes hoping to synergize the advantages of both. Online and blended
programs incorporate available technologies in offering asynchronous and synchronous/real-time
delivery options and tools such as online discussion boards, chat rooms, and video conferencing.

United States of America (USA)

The growth of online enrollments in the U.S. has increased for the 14th consecutive year irrespective
of an expanding or shrinking economy and rising or declining overall college enrollments. At the
same time, the number of students exclusively taking face-to-face classes on a brick and mortar
campus has been dropping (Seaman, Allen, & Seaman, 2018). In 2016, there were over 6 million
students in the U.S. who enrolled in at least one online course (Lederman, 2018), and the proportion
of students enrolled in at least one online course has risen to over 30%. Public institutions and not-
for-profit institutions have the largest percentage of students taking online classes. Continued
growth of online programs, especially for business education, seems to be on the horizon in the
next five years. Surprisingly, over half the students that took at least one online class also took
a course on campus, and students not physically present in the U.S. who enrolled in U.S. online
degree programs were only 1 percent of all students taking online classes. This implies that the
majority of online programs are not currently attracting students who live far from the university.
Effectively continuing to increase the number of students from faraway locations within and outside
the U.S. presents both an opportunity and a challenge to universities.
The obvious advantages of online programs to the university include increasing enrollments and
profits, extending university reach, increasing student technological skills, mitigating the projected
shortfall in instructors, eliminating overcrowding of classrooms, reducing infrastructure cost, allow-
ing students to work at their own pace and learning style, reducing faculty bias, and improving
retention and graduation rates (Popovich & Neel, 2005).
However, educational institutions also face a variety of institutional-, instructor-, and student-
related impediments to successful implementation, maintenance, and growth of online programs.
First, there has been a steady decline in college enrollment in the U.S., from 20.6 million in 2011
to 19 million in 2016 (Hildreth, 2017), and is expected to be significant in the late 2020s (Hoover,
2017). Reasons for declining college enrollments include (a) increasing cost of a college education,
(b) skepticism about the incremental value of higher education, (c) decline in the rate of timely
degree completion, (d) unwillingness to travel long distances, (e) increasing cost of commuting, (f)
unwillingness to incur long-term debts, and (g) social concerns, such as perceived insufficient
institutional support for low-income, minority, and foreign students, and peers from different
backgrounds, culture, or interests. Top-tier universities are less likely to face this declining enroll-
ment problem. Due to stiff competition, universities in the Northeast are more likely to face the
challenge of declining enrollments.
Besides the challenge of declining enrollments, there is the challenge of change in student profile.
Research shows that students in above 25 years of age category will increase. Hoover (2017) suggests
that the solution involves creative thinking such as exploring educational programs to attract
236 S. PALVIA ET AL.

international students, implementing online or blended courses that could help reduce commuting
costs and student travel time, and accelerating graduation rates, especially for students working full
time.
Institutional factors such as lack of understanding of online pedagogy and online learning styles,
lack of administrative support for online education and for marketing the program, number of
students enrolled, faculty qualifications, tuition rates, and length of the program (Kentnor, 2015) can
also doom the program to failure. In addition, Popovich and Neel (2005) investigated a variety of
institutional characteristics that relate to online courses and programs at AACSB-accredited business
schools. They noted disadvantages such as potentially reduced quality of education, increased faculty
training costs, faculty resistance, financial aid constraints, employer bias against online degrees, lack
of appropriateness for all subjects/course content, increased cost of technological update, program
startup costs and challenges, potentially reduced student/professor interaction, irrelevance of pre-
vious location advantage, and potential infringement on existing programs.
Institutions also need to take student concerns seriously. Valid student concerns include experi-
encing isolation from peers and professors, concerns about mastering new technology and software,
potential for negative perception of online degrees by employers, and potential for reduced quality of
instruction relative to the same courses taught as traditional face-to-face classes. Graduates of online
programs voice concerns such as regret that they did not conduct more detailed research about the
program to ensure a good fit for them and lack of full information about cost and financial aid,
provided by the university.
While the market for more online programs with global coverage appears to exist, adequate
planning and implementation of best practices and innovative strategies is necessary for a university
to successfully introduce and/or expand online education given the challenges outlined above. To
implement a successful online program, or launch a successful online course, the program/course
being offered needs to harness innovative technology in a way that enhances student learning
beyond face-to-face classes rather than water down the curriculum, promote reduced learning,
deliver an inferior product, and heighten student and faculty frustration. Any online program or
course should provide extra (over and above traditional program or course) benefits to its various
stakeholders: students, faculty, administrators, and employers.

India
As mentioned by KPMG India and Google, developing countries like India are in a better position to
ignore the erroneous models adopted earlier in advanced countries like USA and leverage the latest
advancements such as hybrid model, addition of new and offbeat subjects, gamification, peer-to-peer
learning, and profile mapping (Bansal, 2017). As per the study made by KPMG India and Google
(2017), the online education system in India currently stands at US $247 million with an average of
1.6 million users; it is expected to grow to US $1.96 billion with around 9.6 million users by 2021.
According to KPMG India and Google, the major drivers for online/blended education in India
include (a) phenomenal growth in Internet2 and smartphone penetration3; (b) low cost of online
education; (c) digital-friendly government policies; and (d) escalating demand by working profes-
sionals and job-seekers for continuing education (Bansal, 2017).
Digital India and Skill India are among the several government initiatives launched to spread digital
literacy in India. Few more such examples are e-Basta (schools’ books in digital form), e-Education (all
schools connected with broadband and free WiFi) in all schools, development of pilot MOOCs
(Massive Online Open Courses), NandGhars (digital tools as teaching aids), SWAYAM (MOOCs
based on curriculum taught in classrooms from 9th class till post-graduation), and India Skills Online
(learning portal for skill training). Clearly, the government initiatives go a long way in reaping benefits
of online education.
 JOURNAL OF GLOBAL INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT 237

Asia and Middle East

Liu (2009) in China explored course design based on pedagogical, psychological, social, and
technological perspectives and found it to be more flexible and useful. A phenomenographic study
(Zhao, McConnel, & Jiang, 2009) proposed five conceptual categories as centrality of the lecture,
online cooperation learning, network learning, student learning and infrastructure and access in
Chinese higher education e-learning. Ye, Su, and Yan (2009) charted growth of Distance Education
College of East China Normal University in three stages – a teacher-focused policy and management,
a quality first policy and thirdly initiation of innovation and use of new platform. Mirza and Al-
Abdulkareem (2011) enlisted challenges of e-learning in Middle East as low internet penetration, low
public esteem for online learning, and lack of online educational repositories in Arabic language. The
major initiatives to promote e-learning in Saudi Arabia were collaborations with institutions of
higher learning, improving quality standard, and developing rules and regulations for governing
e-learning

Australia and New Zealand

Mirroring global trends, the 2000–2011 saw a dramatic growth in open access online education in
Australia and the Asia Pacific Region (Greenland, 2011). Swinburne University of Technology
(SUT), a pioneer in Australia’s online tertiary education sector, reflected the national growth in
the online education scenario and the experience of many of Australia’s online tertiary providers
(Greenland & Moore, 2014). SUT’s growth in open access online education was achieved in partner-
ship with Open Universities Australia (OUA) “a national leader in online higher education” (OUA,
2013). OUA is a collaborative venture with several Australian leading universities, of which SUT is
a shareholder and provider partner (Greenland & Moore, 2014). On the technology side, Hillier
(2018) recognized the lack of infrastructure in Australia especially high bandwidth connectivity
among remote locations as a major bottleneck that can be alleviated by providing an offline
processing capability. This would typically call for a rapidly synchronizing setup between offline
and online systems to assure the best quality of learning for the end user. The factors identified by
Smyrnova-Trybulska et al. (2016) for the popularity and adoption of MOOCs in Australia include
(a) motivation among students as they have to operate in an increasingly digital and global economy;
(b) need for lifelong learning in a fast-changing macroeconomy; (c) preference for self-learning; (d)
greater chances of acceptance of online certificates by regulatory bodies; and (e) possibility of cross
acceptance of offline and online learning credits bringing formal and informal learning both as the
norms of education. A report submitted by Wright (2010) to Ministry of Education, Government of
New Zealand recognizes that e-learning is a potent tool for peer and collaborative learning in
a technologically rich context of New Zealand and is expected that it would lead to better learning
outcomes and better student–teacher relationships in future.

Africa
South Africa is amongst the most developed African country with an evolved digital infrastructure
and has a clear e-education policy in place. Exploring the e-education policy in South Africa,
Vandeyar (2015) argues that there are gaps in the policy comprehension by intermediaries like
district and province officials resulting in several problems in the actual implementation of national
e-education policy. Authors call for greater participation of intermediaries in policy formulation for
them to be relevant stakeholders. According to Kotouaa, Ilkana, and Kilicb (2015), Ghana is among
the most progressive countries in Africa with much better access to Internet and other resources at
the disposal of its citizens. The authors argue that online availability of academic credentials has
helped the working class improve their skills without giving up their jobs although the overall
perception of online education is still not very positive (Kotouaa et al., 2015). In another recent study
238 S. PALVIA ET AL.

aiming to assess ICT capacity across Africa, Mulhanga and Lima (2018) analyzed existing techno-
logical and scientific ecosystems in place in Africa in general and Mozambique in particular. This
article reviews existing challenges for National Research and Education Networks (which form
a bedrock for both scientific research and e-learning across many nations) and their deployment
in Africa and proposes a service model for fostering e-learning. An interesting study by Porter et al.
(2016) argues that majority of African students might access Internet and related education content
on their mobiles, but it is important that the harmful impact such as addiction to smartphones is also
taken into consideration while formulating policy (especially for school going students) to ensure
better educational outcomes. This study contrasts the positive and negative impacts of mobile
e-education across Ghana, South Africa, and Malawi. Overall, ICT capacity across Africa is not
evolved much although mobile-based learning seems to be heading toward a critical mass and may
have a major impact. Jaffer, Ng’ambi, and Czerniewicz (2007) have argued that multiple levels of
challenges exist among developing nations with regard to education, and ICT intervention in
education should be driven by actual gaps rather than available technology choices. Joshua,
Nehemiah, and Ernest (2015) take this further and emphasize the role of understanding cultural
and local issues before designing an e-learning system for improved outcomes.

Conclusions and Implications for Countries and World Organizations

This editorial presents the status and challenges and trends in the online education arena in five
regions of the world – North America, Europe, South America, Asia, Asia-Pacific, and Africa. We
described evolution of online education based on available technology since the days of telegraphy.
At present, universities of USA are facing the challenge of continuously declining enrollments in
their education programs. India, a developing economy from Asia, formally experienced online
education only in 2008. Recent research proves that country-level factors of India are providing
impetus to the growth of online education in the country, and with the active participation of
governments at all levels, this market is expected to record continuous growth in the coming years
too. Middle East countries have been late followers of online education. Past research reveals that
low internet penetration, low public esteem for online learning, and lack of online educational
repositories in Arabic language are main obstacles to the growth of online education in Middle East
countries. Australia and New Zeeland too have recognized online education to be a potent tool for
peer and collaborative learning and, in a technologically rich context, are witnessing growing
popularity of online education programs. Ghana, South Africa, and Malawi from African countries
lead the online education movement in the continent with the support of government policies
promoting online education.
It is clear from above overview that e-education is getting traction in almost all parts of the world
and is here to stay worldwide. Implications for governments and businesses of countries and world
bodies can be summarized as follows:

● Telecommunications infrastructure with focus on high bandwidth connectivity has to improve.

Advanced countries can help neighboring countries. Already this technology cooperation has
been happening with countries like USA, China, and India assisting their neighboring
countries.
● Online education quality must be improved and perceived as equal to traditional Face to Face
(F2F) classroom-based education. This will ensure recognition of online education on par with
the traditional education. Ultimately, getting credentials in any mode of education should
become indistinguishable from one another.
● Organizations of all types – Small and Medium size Enterprise (SMEs) or Multinational
Corporation (MNCs), manufacturing or financial, for-profit or not-for-profit, public or pri-
vate – have a need for their employees to get continuing education. It is increasingly being
realized that the best way to get such education is through some form of online education.
 JOURNAL OF GLOBAL INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT 239

● Which form of online education is the best? That is a million dollar question. At this time, it is
abundantly clear that we ought to combine the virtues of both online (virtual) and offline (F2F)
education. It appears that blended or flipped education can help to strike an optimal balance
between e-education and traditional education. This will help perpetuate a healthy balance
between hi-tech and hi-touch in e-education. This will also avoid harmful effects of addiction
to information technology artifacts like smartphones, the Internet, and Facebook.
● Eventually, globalization of e-education is bound to happen, just as we have witnessed
globalization of e-mail, e-commerce, and e-government. World bodies like United Nations,
World Bank, and World Trade Organization (WTO) have to get involved in this endeavor to
establish meaningful standards in curriculum, certifications, students screening, faculty selec-
tion, learning management systems. Ziguras (2001) studied e-learning and termed it as
“educational imperialism” where transnational institutions expect students to conform to
western models of education and do not understand the cultural traditions. The paper
emphasizes the need for openness to new modes of education like online learning in its various
modes.
● A major theme originating from almost all countries is that that one model fits all has
clearly not worked. What we need is a right mix of localization, adjustment to cultural
diversity, and technology that include Learning Management System in the context of lack
of resources and infrastructure in certain parts of the world. Also, training of the last mile
trainers and end users with regard to technology seems to be a recurring issue across almost
all such studies.

Notes
1. A method of writing rapidly by substituting characters, abbreviations, or symbols for letters, sounds, words,
or phrases (stenography). The major systems of shorthand are those devised in 1837 by Sir Isaac Pitman
and in 1888 by John R. Gregg(1867–1948). (Source: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/
shorthand).
2. As per the report by IAMAI (2018), the number of Internet users in India is expected to reach 500 million by
June 2018.
3. With the phenomenal growth of smartphone users, it is likely that these users will increasingly like to benefit
from huge number of available online learning modules given their convenience, flexibility, and ease of access.

Notes on contributors
Shailendra Palvia is Professor and ex-director of MIS at Long Island University (LIU) Post. He has published over 150
articles in refereed journals and conference proceedings including Decision Sciences, CACM, MIS Quarterly,
Information & Management, CAIS. He has co-edited five books on Global IT/Sourcing Management. He was
Fulbright-Nehru Senior Scholar during 2016–2017. He has been an invited speaker to Germany, India, Italy, Russia,
Singapore, Thailand, and USA.

Prageet Aeron is a faculty member at MDI Gurgaon, India. He is a Fellow of Management (Computers and
Information Systems) from the Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad, and a graduate of IIT-BHU, Varanasi.
His research interests are Technology Strategy & Entrepreneurship, Telecom Policy, and Network Economics. His
teaching interests include IT Security, Big Data, and Machine learning.

Parul Gupta is a faculty member in the area of Public Policy & Governance at MDI Gurgaon. She holds Ph.D. in Law
from Jamia Milia Islamia in Delhi. Her areas of expertise in teaching and training include legal aspects of business,
vigilance enquiry, ethics in public service, and public procurement. She is an author of three books and several articles
and case studies published in journals.

Diptiranjan Mahapatra is currently an associate professor at the Indian Institute of Management (IIM) at Sambalpur.
His research interest and work is at the intersection of Strategy, Public Policy, and Economics in the area of Energy,
Infrastructure, Environment and Climate Change. In recent past, Diptiranjan worked as Research Associate with
Brookhaven National Laboratory, Department of Energy (DoE), USA.
240 S. PALVIA ET AL.

Ratri Parida is an assistant professor in Operations Management Area at Indian Institute of Management (IIM)
Sambalpur. Her research interest focuses on Ergonomics/Human Factors Engineering, Sustainability, Data Analytics,
and Quality Management. She has participated in several researches contributing to the development of the Ergonomic
interventions in organizations and Viable Systems Approach (VSA).

Rebecca Rosner is a professor of Accounting at LIU Post, teaching Auditing/Data Analytics and Accounting
Information Systems to undergraduate and graduate classes in the face-to-face and blended/hybrid learning formats.
Her research interests include fraudulent financial reporting, auditor’s risk assessment, auditor independence, and
accounting information systems education, and current applications.

Dr. Sumita Sindhi is an assistant professor at IIM Sambalpur (Odisha, India) in Strategic Management. She has
teaching experience in business and rural management. She has research interest on topics of innovation, social
entrepreneurship, and sustainable development. She has conducted several research projects, consultancies, and
training programs and has published widely.

References
Alavi, M. (1994). Computer-mediated collaborative learning: An empirical evaluation. MIS Quarterly, 18(2), 159–174.
doi:10.2307/249763
Alavi, M., & Leidner, D. E. (2001). Review: Knowledge management and knowledge management systems: Conceptual
foundations and research issues. MIS Quarterly, 25(1), 107–136. doi:10.2307/3250961
Anderson, T., & Dron, J. (2011). Three generations of distance education pedagogy. The International Review of
Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 12(3), 80–97. doi:10.19173/irrodl.v12i3.890
Bansal, S. (2017). How India’s ed-tech sector can grow and the challenges it must overcome. VC Circle. https://www.
vccircle.com/the-present-and-future-of-indias-online-education-industry
Dziuban, C., Picciano, A. G., Graham, C. R., & Moskal, P. D. (2016). Conducting research in online and blended
learning environments: New pedagogical frontiers. New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
Gensler, L. (2014, February). From correspondence courses to MOOCs: The highlights of distance learning over the
ages. Forbes, 12, 2014.
Greenland, S. J. (2011). Using log data to investigate the impact of (a)synchronous learning tools on LMS interaction.
Proceedings of the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education (ASCILITE) Conference,
Hobart, Australia.
Greenland, S. J., & Moore, C. (2014). Patterns of student enrolment and attrition in Australian open access online
education: A preliminary case study. Open Praxis, 6(1), 45–54. doi:10.5944/openpraxis.6.1.95
Hildreth, B. (2017). U.S. Colleges are facing a demographic and existential crisis. Huffington Post. 6/26/17, updated 7/
5/17.
Hillier, M. (2018). Bridging the digital divide with off-line e-learning. Distance Education, 39(1), 110–112. doi:10.1080/
01587919.2017.1418627
Hoover, E. (2017, December). Demographic changes as destiny in college admissions? It’s complicated. The Chronicle
of Higher Education, 14, 2017.
Jaffer, S., Ng’ambi, D., & Czerniewicz, L. (2007). The role of ICTs in higher education in South Africa: One strategy for
addressing teaching and learning challenges. International Journal of Education and Development Using ICT
[Online], 3(4). http://ijedict.dec.uwi.edu/viewarticle.php?id=421
Joshua, C. E., Nehemiah, M., & Ernest, M. (2015). A conceptual culture-oriented e-learning system development
framework (e-LSDF): A case of higher education institutions in South Africa. International Journal of Trade,
Economics and Finance, 6(5), 229–265. doi:10.18178/ijtef.2015.6.5.479
Kentnor, H. E. (2015). Distance education and the evolution of online learning in the United States; curriculum and
teaching dialogue. Information Age Publishing, Charlotte, 17(1/2), 21–34.
Kotouaa, S., Ilkana, M., & Kilicb, H. (2015). The growing of online education in sub-Saharan Africa: Case study
Ghana. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 191, 2406–2411. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.04.670
KPMG & Google (2017). Online Education in India: 2021. https://assets.kpmg.com/content/dam/kpmg/in/pdf/2017/
05/Online-Education-in-India-2021.pdf
Lederman, D. (2018). Who is studying online (and Where): Inside higher Ed, https://www.insidehighered.com/digital-
learning/article/2018/01/05/new-us-data-show-continued-growth-college-students-studying
Liu, M. (2009). The design of a web-based course for self-directed learning. Campus-Wide Information System, 26(2),
122–131. doi:10.1108/10650740910946846
Mirza, A. A., & Al-Abdulkareem, M. (2011). Models of e-learning adopted in the Middle East. Applied Computing and
Informatics, 9(2), 83–93. doi:10.1016/j.aci.2011.05.001
Mulhanga, M. M., & Lima, S. R. (2018). Building sustainable NRENs in Africa - A technological and e-education
perspective. In Á. Rocha, H. Adeli, L. P. Reis, & S. Costanzo (Eds)., Trends and advances in information systems and
 JOURNAL OF GLOBAL INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT 241

technologies. World CIST’18 2018. Advances in intelligent systems and computing, Naples, Italy (pp. 745). Cham:
Springer.
Open Universities Australia (OUA). (2013). About Us. Retrieved October 15, 2013, from http://www.open.edu.au/
about-us/
Palvia, S., Kumar, A., Kumar, O., & Kumar, S. (2017). Exploring themes, trends, and frameworks: A meta-analysis of
online business education research. In: AMCIS 2017 conference, MA, Boston, August 10- 12, 2017.
Palvia, S. C. (2013). E-evolution or E-revolution: E-mail, E-commerce, E-government, E-education. Journal of IT Case
and Application Research, Editorial Preface Article, 15(4), 4–12.
Popovich, C. J., & Neel, R. E. (2005). Characteristics of distance education programs at accredited business schools.
American Journal of Distance Education, 19, 229–240. doi:10.1207/s15389286ajde1904_4
Porter, G., Hampshire, K., Milner, J., Munthali, A., Robson, E., De Lannoy, A., … Abane, A. (2016). Mobile phones
and education in sub-Saharan Africa: From youth practice to public policy. Journal of International Development,
28, 22–39. doi:10.1002/jid.v28.1
Seaman, J. E., Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2018). Grade increase: Tracking distance education in the United States.
Wellesley: The Babson Survey Research Group, MA, USA.
Smyrnova-Trybulska, E., Ogrodzka-Mazur, E., Szafrańska-Gajdzica, A., Morze, N., Makhachashvili, R., Noskova, T., …
Issa, T., (2016). MOOCs – Theoretical and practical aspects: Comparison of selected research results: Poland,
Russia, Ukraine, and Australia. In: International Conferences ITS, ICEduTech and STE 2016, Dec 6-8, Melbourne,
Australia, edited by: Piet Kommers, TomayessIssa, Theodora Issa, Elspeth McKay, Pedro Isaías, Associate Editor:
Luís Rodrigues, ISBN: 978-989-8533-58-6, 107–114.
Vandeyar, T. (2015). Policy intermediaries and the reform of e-Education in South Africa. British Journal of
Educational Technology, 46(2), 344–359. doi:10.1111/bjet.12130
Wright, N., (2010). e-Learning and implications for New Zealand schools: A literature review. Report to the Ministry
of Education. Retrieved May 2, 2018, from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.617.
4373&rep=rep1&type=pdf
Ye, L., Su, X., & Yan, H. (2009). The development of the Distance Education College of East China Normal University:
A case study. Campus-Wide Information System, 26(2), 108–113. doi:10.1108/10650740910946828
Zhao, J., McConnel, D., & Jiang, Y. (2009). Teachers conceptions of e-learning in Chinese higher education:
A phenomenographic analysis. Campus-Wide Information System, 26(2), 90–97. doi:10.1108/10650740910946800
Ziguras, C. (2001). Educational technology in transnational higher education in South East Asia: The cultural politics
of flexible learning. Educational Technology Society, 4(4).