Editor’s Note: Longitudinal studies are infrequent because consistent data is seldom collected on a year-to-year basis. This study shows less than significant differences for three courses that were conducted over a 4 year period.

Longitudinal Comparison between
Online and Face-to-Face Courses in
an Adult Continuing Education Program

Mary Rose Grant and Heather R. Thornton

United States

Abstract

A longitudinal study was conducted to explore differences in student perceptions between online and face-to-face courses in an undergraduate adult credit and continuing education program. Differences were assessed in the areas of Instructional Effectiveness, Course Difficulty, Course Comparability, Necessity of Prerequisites and the Perceived Quality of the Textbook. Using archival data from 58 online and face-to-face end-of-course evaluations from courses taught between 2002 and 2005, 784 student responses were collated and analyzed. Online and face-to-face classes in biology, history, theology and philosophy taught by the same discipline-prepared instructors were examined. Instructors used the same syllabi and learning objectives during this four year period. Statistical tests were used to determine whether any differences existed between online and face-to-face course ratings. Overall, results revealed that there were more differences between the years than between the course formats. This study has implications for administrators who are considering launching online courses and faculty considering transitioning courses from face-to-face to online formats.

Keywords: adult credit program, undergraduate adult education, non-traditional learners, adult online education, teaching effectiveness, online versus face-to-face, course difficulty, longitudinal, textbook use, prerequisites, online faculty, adult continuing education, baby boomers versus gen x’ers, online humanity courses

Introduction

Over the years, Web-based courses have become a viable option for adult students with demanding schedules and extracurricular obligations. Increasing availability of and enrollment in such courses presents the need for educators to determine whether these courses provide comparative learning outcomes and satisfaction levels for students as more traditional face-to-face courses (Allen & Seaman, 2006). While perceptions remain that face-to-face classes are superior to online courses in rigor, quality, achieving student learning outcomes and levels of satisfaction, online courses are gaining support (DeFleur & Adams, 2004; Enger, 2006). Online courses are demonstrating rigor and quality in development, as well as delivery and presentation of content (Allen & Seaman, 2006; Neuhauser, 2002). Veteran faculty and administrators hesitate to offer online courses and programs despite these facts and growing student interest in online formats. The fear that students will not receive the same quality of education and level of rigor as they would in traditional courses prevails in higher education arenas. These fears stem from lack of knowledge about online pedagogy and guidance in the development of online courses.

The common view that online classes do not transfer information to students as well as traditional face-to-face courses or achieve the same learning outcomes does not stand up against current research in the field (Peabody, 2001; Symonds, 2001). Researchers often compare the two course formats, either with data from students’ perceptions of the course or with data on performance-based learning outcomes (i.e. grades). While such studies have been criticized for not accounting for students’ individual differences, researchers have recently presented evidence that there are no differences in learning outcomes between groups when individual differences are taken into account (Liu, 2006; Thurmond, Wambach, Connors, & Frey, 2002).

Theoretical Framework

Certain theories suggest that adults may perform better in Web-based learning environments because such environments cater to their individual needs and learning preferences more so than face-to-face environments. Adult learning theory, developed by Knowles (1970), posits that adults are autonomous and self-directed individuals who prefer to participate actively and take responsibility for their own learning. Since adult learners have garnered a myriad of life experiences, learning to be effective must relate theory and concept to practical and applicable experiences outside of the classroom (e.g. the workplace). Adult learners usually have specific goals in mind when they enroll in a course, and they appreciate organization and structure in course requirements as well as presentation of course materials. Adult learners may not be interested in taking courses for the sole sake of learning but to attain goals that are tangible
(e.g. career advancement and marketable skills). Finally, adult learners require respect; they bring life and work experiences to the classroom and want to be treated as co-creators or facilitators of their own learning.

Another theory that supports online learning for adults is the constructivist learning theory. Constructivism asserts that knowledge is constructed based on previous experience (Spigner-Littles & Anderson, 1999). The emphasis on experience and subjective reality is consistent with the needs of adult learners. These learners connect new learning to previous experiences, and acquire knowledge actively and internally rather than externally or passively as transmitted by an instructor. Adult learners, with life experience find it difficult to accept learning that is not authentic or experiential. It is difficult to change misperceptions or pre-conceived ideas and beliefs when new concepts are only transmitted through passive lecture with no interaction between instructor and student. Adult learners are more likely to replace old beliefs when they are allowed to construct new knowledge on their own. Therefore, courses are more effective when the instructor is a facilitator, rather than a passive transmitter of student learning (Enger, 2006; Spigner-Littles & Anderson, 1999; Wonacott, 2000). The online learning environment gives adult learners an opportunity to take on a more active role in the learning process.

In addition to the above mentioned theories, there is evidence that faculty can benefit from awareness and identification of generational learning styles. For instance, students who are in the Baby Boomer generation require and respond to different teaching strategies than do students in Generation X. Many current adult learners are Generation X’ers, while many of the faculty are Baby Boomers (Coates, 2007). Research regarding learning preferences of Generation X’ers supports the theories of adult learning and constructivism (Boomsma & Waldschmidt, 2007; Coates, 2007). For instance, members of Generation X value efficiency and tend to be independent. They want to know what their options are and what is expected of them upfront. “Generation X’ers” also value visual presentations and technology. This assessment of students aged 27 to 42 suggests that this group of individuals is able to accept, appreciate, and be successful in online learning environments (Coates, 2007).

Online Courses Open Educational Doors for Adult Learners

One primary advantage of online learning for adults with busy schedules is the flexible nature of the virtual environment (Huang, 2002; Spigner-Littles & Anderson, 1999). Learning in an any-time any-place modality accommodates the best frame of mind for learning, which is not after an eight-hour work day. Online courses open up educational possibilities for adults who otherwise might not have found the time to pursue an education. In addition, the Internet provides numerous learning resources that not only provide practical applications to learners’ lives but also encourage expanded discovery and constructivist learning. Wonacott (2000) found that learners who were more computer savvy could utilize this available resource more effectively.

Evidence That Online Courses Provide a Similar Quality of Education

Evidence suggests that Web-based courses provide the same quality of education and level of student satisfaction as face-to-face courses. One such study comparing face-to-face and online graduate courses reported that, although students enrolled in face-to-face courses had higher perceptions of the instructor’s overall teaching effectiveness, comparisons of student learning outcomes (i.e. grades) resulted in no significant differences between the groups for several different outcome measures (Johnson, Aragon, Shaik, & Palma-Rivas, 2000).

Neuhauser (2002) examined differences in gender, age, learning preferences and styles, media familiarity, effectiveness of tasks, course effectiveness, test grades, and final grades for online and face-to-face courses where 91% of the students were 22 years of age or older. She compared general effectiveness of online instruction to face-to-face instruction and found no significant differences between groups for any of the variables in question. Although not statistically significant, 96% of students who had taken the online course reported that the course was either as effective as or more effective for their learning than traditional face-to-face courses. She concluded that online instruction is as effective as face-to-face instruction.

In addition to evidence that no significant differences exist between online and face-to-face student learning, Liu (2005) presented evidence that content can be delivered to students in online courses as effectively, if not more effectively, as in face-to-face courses. In his study, learning outcomes were compared between graduate online and face-to-face research methods courses. Learning outcomes from chapter quizzes, final exam, essay writings, peer critiques, and group projects were investigated. Results showed that online students outperformed face-to-face students on quizzes and the final exam, implying that graduate online education can provide improved learning outcomes for students compared to the same traditional face-to-face course. These results indicate that online courses are effective and should continue to be developed.

Current Study

The current research seeks to demonstrate that students enrolled in undergraduate online courses receive the same quality of education with the same amount of rigor as they would in a traditional face-to-face course. There are few longitudinal studies that compare adult student perceptions of online and face-to-face courses in an undergraduate adult education program. This study expands on existing research by examining student perceptions about online learning in an adult undergraduate program at an urban private institution over the course of four years (Grant, 2004).

All online and face-to-face courses in this study were matched by instructor. Specifically, the face-to-face and online courses in each discipline in this study were taught by the same instructor over a four year time frame. In addition, courses were evaluated from the inception of the online course program. A literature search determined that the majority of studies in this area involve samples of traditional undergraduate or graduate students; this research utilizes a sample of undergraduate nontraditional adult students over the age of 22, with an average age of 34, that were enrolled in an adult and continuing education program.

The authors believe that there will be no significant differences between online and face-to-face student perceptions of the course, and differences that are found will indicate that students enrolled in online courses will perceive that they are receiving a higher quality of education than those enrolled in face-to-face courses.

Hypotheses

1. There will be no significant differences between ratings of Instructional Effectiveness for online and face-to-face groups across all course subjects.

2. There will be no significant differences between ratings of Course Comparability for online and face-to-face groups across all course subjects.

3. There will be no significant differences between ratings of Course Difficulty for online and face-to-face groups across all course subjects.

4. There will be no significant differences between perceived Necessity of Prerequisites for online and face-to-face groups across all course subjects.

5. There will be no significant differences between Perceived Quality of the Textbook for online and face-to-face groups across all course subjects.

Methods

Participants

Data was utilized from 806 students attending an urban private Midwestern university School for Adult and Continuing Education with an FTE of about 700 students. Evaluations were completely anonymous; therefore no demographic information was documented. On average, the school enrolls approximately 500 degree seeking adult students in online courses each year. The majority of students enrolled in online courses are female (63%) and 31% of students enrolled in online courses are African American. Responses were used from students who enrolled in either the online or face-to-face version of the following core classes: one anthropology course (n=19), eight biology courses (n=99), eleven history courses (n=105), 17 philosophy courses (n=237), and 22 theology courses (n=343) from the years 2002 to 2005. It should be noted that the online course program began in 2002.

Measure

Researchers used archival data from end-of-course evaluations submitted by students at the end of each term. Evaluation forms were distributed to students in the 7^th week of the 9-week term for both online and face-to-face courses taught by the same instructor.

The evaluation instrument consisted of 20 items that assessed Instructional Effectiveness, Course Comparability, Course Difficulty, Necessity of Prerequisites, and the Perceived Quality of the Course Textbook. Factor analysis was performed on all items to obtain the following subscales: Instructional Effectiveness, Course Comparability, and Course Difficulty. Factors were extracted through varimax rotation. All subscales demonstrated sufficient reliability with alpha coefficients of 0.96, 0.89, and 0.84 respectively. Two items, one assessing Necessity of Prerequisites and the other assessing Perceived Quality of Textbooks, were analyzed individually as they did not load with other factors.

Instructional Effectiveness: This 13-item subscale measures the degree to which students believed the instructor conducted the course in the appropriate pedagogical manner. Students rated their professors based on the degree to which the instructor appeared prepared to teach the course, course delivery, and use of learning enhancement tools (e.g. educational videos); instructor characteristics like impartiality, accessibility, and responsiveness to students were also included in the subscale. Questions are presented on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from ‘strongly disagree’ to ‘strongly agree.’ Examples include “The instructor was knowledgeable in the subject area”, “The instructor presented the material in an understandable manner”, and “The instructor used education technologies to enhance the learning experience.” One question relating to the instructor’s approachability and fairness was “I felt free to ask questions or disagree with the instructor during class.”

Course Comparability: The Course Comparability subscale is composed of two items to assess the degree to which the course being evaluated ranks against other courses students have taken at the university, and how the professor rates against other professors as well. Questions included “In comparison with other college teachers, this instructor was…” and “In comparison with other college classes you have had, this class was...” Questions are on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from ‘poor’ to ‘excellent.’

Course Difficulty- This 3-item subscale assesses the degree to which students perceived course assignments as difficult, as well as perceptions of overall course difficulty. Questions are on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from ‘too easy’ to ‘too difficult.’ Questions such as “Assignments and homework were…” and “Overall, this class was…” were included in this subscale.

Analysis

Means were calculated. Anthropology courses were excluded from further analysis due to lack of a sufficient number of online course evaluations. Philosophy evaluations for the year of 2002 were excluded from further analyses because online courses taught by the instructor of interest were not offered. In addition, face-to-face history course data from the year 2003 was excluded for the same reasons. Data was aggregated across year and category for ease of analysis. A 2-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to test each course using course format (online/face-to-face) and evaluation year (2002 to 2005) as independent variables and each of the subscales and individual items as dependent variables. Significant effects were followed up with Scheffe post hoc tests.

Data from two different faculty members was used for biology courses. In addition, data was used for introductory level and advanced philosophy courses. In order to remove the effect of differences in faculty teaching styles (in biology courses) and difficulty due to course level (for philosophy courses), an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) test was utilized. Fisher LSD post hoc tests were used to follow up significant ANCOVA results.

Results

Theology

See Table 1 for significant results. A significant main effect of year, F (3, 335) = 6.29, p<.001, was found for evaluations of Instructional Effectiveness (see Figure 1). Online and face-to-face students rated the course instruction as more effective in 2004 than any other year and ratings were lowest in 2003.

A significant main effect of year, F (3, 334) = 8.57, p<.001, was also found for both online and face-to-face evaluations of Course Comparability (see Figure 1a). Students’ ratings of Course Comparability were significantly lower in 2003 than any other year. Online and face-to-face students rated Course Difficulty highest for 2002 and lowest in 2005, F (3, 335) = 3.25, p<.05 (see Figure 1b).

This trend may be due to the individual faculty member adapting to teaching online. In addition, teaching online may subsequently influence teaching the same course in the face-to-face format. A main effect of year, F (3, 334) = 5.28, p<.01 was found for the Perceived Quality of the Textbook (see Figure 1c). Students responded that the textbook was least useful in 2003. A significant format x year interaction, F (3, 334) = 4.31, p<.01, for the Perceived Quality of Textbook was also found (see Figure 2).

Table 1

Univariate Analysis of Variance Results Comparing Online and Face-to-face Evaluations
of Theology Courses Taken From Years 2002 to 2005

Post hoc analysis revealed that online students rated the quality of the textbook significantly higher than face-to-face students in 2003. Textbook ratings for face-to-face classes increased the next year and were rated significantly higher than online students.

Figure 1. Instructional Effectiveness
Main Effect of Year for Theology Courses

Figure 1a. Course Comparability
Main Effect of Year for Theology Courses

Figure 1b. Course Difficulty Main Effect of Year for Theology Courses

Figure 1c. Perceived Quality of Textbooks Main Effect of Year
for Theology Courses

Face-to-face students rated the quality of the textbooks significantly lower in the year 2003 than both 2004 and 2005. However, online students’ perceptions of the textbook remained relatively stable across the four years.

Figure 2. Format x Year Interaction Effect of
Perceived Quality of Textbook for Theology Courses

Philosophy

In 2003, upper division courses were introduced in online format. When the effect of course level was removed, univariate analysis revealed a significant interaction between course format and year, F (2, 205) = 3.71, p<.05 for Course Difficulty (see Table 2 and Figure 3). In 2003, students enrolled in face-to-face courses perceived their courses as more difficult than students taking online courses. However, in 2004, online course ratings of difficulty dramatically increased above face-to-face courses. Responses shifted again in 2005 when those enrolled in online courses responded that their courses were less difficult. ANCOVA was used to adjust scores to correct for the difference between lower and upper level philosophy courses. However, other factors like individual student differences that cannot be corrected with ANCOVA may explain the increased difficulty for online students in 2003.

Table 2

Univariate Analysis of Covariance Results Comparing Online and
Face-to-face Evaluations of Philosophy Courses Taken From Years 2003-2005

Figure 3: Format x Year Interaction Effect of Course Difficulty
for Philosophy Courses

History

Face-to-face students perceived the instruction to be more effective than online students across all years (see Table 3 and Figure 4). There was a significant main effect of format for Course Comparability, F (1, 86) = 4.15, p<.05. Face-to-face students consistently provided higher ratings of Course Comparability than online students. This suggests that students enrolled in face-to-face courses rated the instruction and course as somewhat more effective than other face-to-face courses.

Table 3

Univariate Analysis of Variance Results Comparing Online and Face-to-face
Evaluations of History Courses Taken From Years 2002, 2004, and 2005

Figure 3: Course Comparability Main Effect of Format
for History Courses

Biology

Table 4 shows all the significant effects for this course subject. When the effect of course instructor was removed, a significant main effect of format, F (1, 92) = 7.90, p<.01, was found for evaluations of Instructional Effectiveness (see Figure 4). Face-to-face students rated their instruction as more effective than online students.

Table 4

Univariate Analysis of Covariance Results Comparing Online and Face-to-Face Evaluations
of Biology Courses taken from years 2002 to 2005

A significant main effect of year, F (2, 92) = 4.05, p<.05, was found for evaluations of Course Comparability (see Figure 4a). Classes were rated significantly higher for the year of 2003 than any other year. A significant main effect of course format, F (1, 92) = 7.88, p<.01, was also found for Course Comparability (see Figure 4b). Face-to-face biology courses were rated more favorably than online courses when compared with other courses students had taken. Results revealed a significant format x year interaction, F (2, 92) = 6.20, p<.01, for the Course Difficulty subscale (see Figure 4c). Online courses were rated as less difficult than face-to-face courses in 2002. However, ratings shifted in 2003 when online courses were rated as more difficult than face-to-face courses. In 2004, ratings of difficulty were similar for both online and face-to-face courses. A significant main effect of course format, F (1, 76) = 8.38, p<.01, was found for the Necessity of Prerequisites variable (see Figure 4d). In online courses, students perceived prerequisites to be less important than students attending face-to-face courses. A significant format x year interaction, F (2, 76) = 3.49, p<.05, was found for the Necessity of Prerequisites variable (see Figure 4e).

Figure 4: Instructional Effectiveness Main Effect of Format for Biology Courses

Figure 4a: Course Comparability Main Effect of Year for Biology Courses

Figure 4b: Course Comparability Main Effect of Format for Biology Courses

Figure 4c: Course Difficulty Format x Year Interaction Effect for Biology Courses

Figure 4d: Necessity of Prerequisites Main Effect of Format for Biology Courses

Figure 4e: Necessity of Prerequisites Format x Year Interaction Effect
 for Biology Courses

Discussion

Instructional Effectiveness

The proposed hypothesis stated that there would be no significant differences between rating of Instructional Effectiveness for online and face-to-face students across all subjects. Overall, results confirmed this hypothesis. Students in both online and face-to-face courses did not perceive a significant difference in Instructional Effectiveness for theology, history and philosophy. No significant differences in online and face-to-face course ratings of Instructional Effectiveness were found in these courses. This indicates that students in face-to-face and online courses perceived that they were receiving adequate and effective instruction in their respective courses. This also indicates that effective teaching cuts across both mediums. The instructors selected to teach had never taught online before the beginning of the program, but were instructors who consistently received higher student ratings in face-to-face courses. Since additional instructors were introduced to the online and face-to-face course environments in 2003, ANCOVA was utilized to remove the effect of differences in teaching styles. However, for biology courses, findings indicated that students enrolled in face-to-face courses perceived the instructional effectiveness to be higher than those enrolled in online courses. This may be due to the content laden nature of biology courses.

In addition, ratings varied across years for those in theology courses. This fluctuation may be due to the effect of the preparation and adjustment period for developing the instructor’s interface when transitioning from teaching exclusively face-to-face to online.

Course Comparability

The proposed hypothesis stated that there would be no significant differences for ratings of the course and instructor for online and face-to-face formats when compared to similar courses students had completed. No significant differences were found for theology, history, and philosophy courses when students were asked to rate how the course in which they were enrolled compared to other courses they had taken. Specifically, online courses were perceived as similar to other online courses and face-to-face courses were rated similarly to other face-to-face courses. In addition, face-to-face courses were not rated as poor or excellent when compared to online courses. This trend suggests that course experience is consistent over time. This includes online course instruction.

However, this trend is somewhat different for evaluations of history and biology courses. When comparing both history and biology courses to those previously taken, face-to-face students rated their current course as much better than previous courses. These results disconfirmed the second hypothesis. Students enrolled in biology and history face-to-face course formats rated their class as excellent compared to other courses they had taken in the past. This may be due to enhanced instruction and increased quality of content in face-to-face courses as a result of teaching the same course online. However, online students reported that their biology and history courses were only slightly better than other online courses. This may suggest that the instruction in online courses is consistent across disciplines since instructors were given similar training for online course development and delivery. Some fluctuations in Course Comparability ratings from 2002 to 2004 for both online and face-to-face courses did occur. While theology courses received the lowest comparability ratings in 2003, biology courses received the highest ratings compared to other courses in 2003. This may be due to student preferences for humanities versus science courses.

Course Difficulty

The third hypothesis stated that there would be no significant differences between online and face-to-face ratings of Course Difficulty. There were no significant differences found between online and face-to-face ratings of Course Difficulty for theology, history, and biology, and history courses. Both online and face-to-face courses were viewed as similarly difficult. However, philosophy courses received different ratings. Although, philosophy ratings of Course Difficulty did fluctuate from 2003 to 2005 for both face-to-face and online philosophy courses, no other significant relationships were found for this variable. This indicates that there were no significant differences for difficulty level between face-to-face and online courses.

Perceived Necessity of Prerequisites

The fourth hypothesis stated that there would be no significant differences between online and face-to-face students for the perceived necessity of prerequisites. Overall, results confirmed this hypothesis. This variable yielded no significant differences for all courses. Prerequisites were equally necessary for all online and face-to-face courses. However, when the year was taken into account, ratings changed for online and face-to-face courses. Differences were found for biology courses. Responses fluctuated from year to year for face-to-face and online courses. In addition, students enrolled in face-to-face courses responded that the prerequisite for the current course was useful. Also, face-to-face student’s ratings were higher than those enrolled in online courses. This may indicate that online students may have a perception that their core courses are disconnected from an overall curriculum plan. In addition, this result may speak to the availability of supplemental resources found on the internet. Online students may be exposed to more resources initially as well as throughout the course. Students in online courses often are required to conduct Internet searches and obtain additional course information outside of the materials provided.

Perceived Quality of the Course Textbook

There were no significant differences between online and face-to-face courses for the Perceived Quality of the Textbook across all course subjects except biology. The textbook was rated least useful for both online and face-to-face courses in 2003. This, too, may result from availability of online resources. This confirms the fifth hypothesis and indicates that there were no significant differences in the perceived quality of the textbooks between online and face-to-face courses. This suggests that a textbook in online courses is used equally as much as in face-to-face courses, if not more.

Study Limitations and Future Directions

Although some limitations exist, as mentioned below, the current study is valuable for its longitudinal nature, inclusion of data from multiple course disciplines, and study of undergraduate adult learners. Since researchers used archival data from end of course evaluations, the data set was independent of this study and therefore unbiased by the authors’ perceptions. Unfortunately, certain variables could not be controlled or results further investigated. Researchers used ANCOVA to correct this where appropriate. However, student variability could not be assessed because specific demographic information was not gathered. More information should be added to the end of course evaluation instrument. As in any longitudinal study, the data set will continue to expand. The inclusion of new data and the periodic recalibration of the study should allow us to refine our results and focus only on the significant differences between online and face-to-face delivery systems.

References

Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2006). Making the grade: Online education in the United States, 2006. Needham, MA: Sloan Consortium.

Boomsma, H. M., & Waldschmidt, S. H. (2007). Moving forward~ trends in continuing and corporate education. Presented March 16, 2007 at Marquette University.

Carey, J. M. (2001). Effective student outcomes: A comparison of online and face-to-face delivery modes. Deosnews. 11.9. Retrieved February 15, 2007, from http://www.ed.psu.edu/acsde/deos/deosnews/deosnews11_9.asp

DeFleur, M. H., & Adams, J. (2004). Acceptability of online degrees as criteria for admission to graduate programs. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 16(1), 150-163.

Enger, K. B. (2006). Minorities and online higher education: Online education offers a color-blind environment to engage students from all background in mentored learning. Educause Quarterly, 29(4). Retrieved November 13, 2006, from http://www.educause.edu/aps/eq/eqm06/eqm0641.asp

Grant, M. R. (2004). Saint Louis University, School for Professional Studies online course initiative: Update.

Huang, H. M. (2002). Toward constructivism for adult learners in online learning environments. British Journal of Educational Technology, 33(1), 27-37.

Johnson, S. D., Aragon, S. R., Shaik, N., & Palma-Rivas, N. (2000). Comparative analysis of learner satisfaction and learning outcomes in online and face-to-face learning environments. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 11(1), 29-49.

Knowles, M. S. (1970). The modern practice of adult education: Adragogy versus pedagogy. New York, Association Press.

Liu, Y. (2005). Effects of online instruction vs. traditional instruction on students’ learning. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2(3), Article 06. Retrieved March 27, 2007, from http://www.itdl.org/Journal/Mar_05/article06.htm

Liu, Y. (2006). A comparison study of online versus traditional student evaluation of instruction. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 3(4), Article 06. Retrieved March 21, 2007, from http://www.itdl.org/Journal/April_06/article02.htm

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

Peabody, Z. (2001, September 27). College education online: Pass? Fail? Los Angeles Times. Retrieved May 5, 2007, from http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/latimes/access/82232508.html?dids=82232508:82232508&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:FT&type=current&date=Sep+27%2C+2001&author=ZANTO+PEABODY&pub=Los+Angeles+Times&edition=&startpage
=T.1&desc=College+Education+Online%3A+Pass%3F+Fail%3F

Shachar, M. & Neumann, Y. (2003). Differences between traditional and distance education academic performances: A meta-analytic approach. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 4(2). Retrieved March 28, 2007, from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/153/234

Spigner-Littles, D., & Anderson, C. E. (1999). Constructivism: A paradigm for older learners. Educational Gerontology, 25, 203-209.

Symonds, W. (2001, December 3). Giving it the old online try. Business Week, 76.

Thurmond, V. A., Wambach, K., Connors, H. R., & Frey, B. B. (2002). Evaluation of student satisfaction: Determining the impact of a web-based environment by controlling for student characteristics. The American Journal of Distance Education, 16(3), 169-189.

Wonacott, M. E. (2000). Web-based training and constructivism in brief: Fast facts for policy and practice No. 2. National Dissemination Center for Career & Technical Education, 2-4.

About the Authors

Appendix

Table 5A

Univariate Analysis of Variance Results Comparing Online and Face-to-face
Evaluations of Courses Taken From Years 2002 to 2005

Table 6

Univariate Analysis of Covariance Results Comparing Online and Face-to-Face
Evaluations of Courses Taken From Years 2002 to 2005