Online Learning: Student Perceptions and Expectations

Pamela L. McGimpsey

Lenoir Rhyne University

Online Learning: Student Perceptions and Expectations

            There have been numerous studies on the benefits of online learning compared to face-to-face instruction regarding design, content, and student participation; with less research focusing on the students understanding and assumption about the online classroom.  With lesson plans requiring students to include more time engaged inside a virtual class it must be taken into consideration the student’s expectations of the online course in which they enroll.  What do learners anticipate when engagement with instructor’s and fellow students is regulated to asynchronous discussion?  Is there a desire for studies to be more rigorous?  Does the need for peer-to-peer affiliation impact student outcomes?  Research suggest an affirmative answer to these questions is causing focus be paid not only to the method of delivery of course learning, but also to the students’ perceptions and expectations of the learning they seek.

Online Learning Perceptions

An initial expectation of online study is that it offers flexibility for the student to attend class at the time and location that best fits into the individuals schedule while meeting course attendance requirements.  Horspoll and Lange (2012) sought to better understand why 119 students chose online over face-to-face instruction finding “47% of respondents indicate they took the course online to reduce their commute to campus.  Second to this response, 36% reported scheduling issues.  Close to a third of students mention taking the course online to accommodate work demands” (p. 78).  

However, flexibility brings with it the opportunity for students to self-pace.  Frimming and Bordelon (2016) found:

Uneven progress through a course presented problems not only for individual students, but also for classmates when students were expected to work together on group projects and in class discussions.  Whether some students advanced too far in the course schedule or were unable to keep up, classmates often felt frustrated by being “out of sync” with peers. (p. 354)

Asynchronous discussion by definition allows for conversation to be developed, stored, and retrieved at the convenience of the speaker and participants at anytime and anywhere.  Miers et al. (2007) collected qualitative data from 48 students participating in 10 online groups evaluating their experience and found asynchronicity was less than advantageous and caused frustration:

I just found it frustrating, because you put a message onto the board and then you have to wait for somebody to get back to you…it’s not like being in class or when you meet for coffee…and you can go through things and you can say to people, “I don’t understand that, and do you understand it?” and somebody will explain to you. (U-AN-2 interview). (p. 534)

While the technological tools for learning are the same for all students, the level of desired learning is different for undergraduate and graduate students.  Holzweiss, Joyner, Fuller, Henderson, and Young (2015) surveyed 86 graduate students pertaining to what helped them learn in the online environment.  The findings revealed graduate students “desired a deeper level of learning that requires more instructional forethought and planning” (p. 311).  In addition to research, writing, and discussion forums study participants also noted critical thinking and problem-solving assignments as best learning experiences.   

Does the need for peer-to-peer affiliation impact student outcomes?  The findings of Seiver and Troja (2014) indicate that it does; “the students who were least likely to want to take another online course were those who scored highest in the need for affiliation” (p. 98).  Horspoll and Lange (2012) found online students ask many more questions than face-to-face students. 

A possible explanation for this finding could be that in face-to-face courses, the physical presence of other students in the classroom may prohibit some form asking questions out of concern for embarrassment in front of their peers.  In an online meeting, students may feel more comfortable asking questions as the online format creates an illusion of anonymity from peer judgement. (p. 82)

Conclusion

            As online learning becomes more integrated into academic and professional learning models the review of the literature lends support to the need for continued research as it pertains to student perception and expectation with online learning.  As Seiver and Troja (2014) found students will take advantage of this learning format, and “instructors who strive to encourage students who have different personalities, needs, and motives will be sought after by students” (p. 103).

References

Frimming, R. E.,  Bordelon, T. D. (2016).  Physical education students’ perceptions of the

            effectiveness of their distance education courses.  The Physical Educator, 73, 340-351.

Holzweiss, P.C., Joyner, S. A., Fuller, M. B., Henderson, S., Young, R. (2014).  Online graduate

students’ perceptions of best learning experiences.  Distance Education, 35(3), 311-323.

Horspool, A., Lange, C. (2012).  Applying the scholarship of teaching and learning: Student

perceptions,  behaviours and success online and face-to-face.  Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 37(1), 73-88.

Miers, M. E., Clarke, B. A., Pollard, K. C., Rickaby, C. E., Thomas, J., Turtle, A. (2007).  Online

            interprofessional learning: The student experience.  Journal of Interprofessional Care,

            21(5), 529-542.

Seiver, J. G., Troja, A. (2014).  Satisfaction and success in online learning as a function of the

            needs for affiliation, autonomy, and mastery.  Distance Education, 35(1) 90-105.