distance education literature review

• Open access
• Published: 15 November 2023

A student-centered approach using modern technologies in distance learning: a systematic review of the literature

• Nurassyl Kerimbayev 1 ,
• Zhanat Umirzakova 1 ,
• Rustam Shadiev 2 &
• Vladimir Jotsov 1 , 3  

Smart Learning Environments volume  10 , Article number:  61 ( 2023 ) Cite this article

13k Accesses

9 Citations

1 Altmetric

Metrics details

A literature review was conducted to develop a clear understanding of the student-centered approach using modern technologies in distance learning. The study aimed to address four research questions: What research experience already exists in the field of the student-centered approach in distance learning? What modern technologies are used in distance learning, and how are they related to the student-centered approach? What are the advantages and limitations of implementing the student-centered approach and modern technologies in distance learning? What recommendations can be derived from existing research for the effective implementation of the student-centered approach and modern technologies in distance learning? The purpose of writing this review article is to provide a comprehensive overview of the student-centered approach using modern technologies in distance learning and its advantages. To conduct this review, a Web of Science and Scopus database was searched using the keywords “student-centered approach,“ “modern technologies,“ and “distance learning.“ The search was limited to articles published between 2012 and 2023. A total of 688 articles were found, which were selected based on their relevance to the topic. After the verification and selection process, 43 articles were included in this review. The main results of the review revealed that the student-centered approach to learning took various forms or was defined individually, and there were significant differences in the main research findings. The review results provide a comprehensive overview of existing studies, advantages and limitations of the student-centered approach using modern technologies in distance learning as well as examples of successful implementation in various educational institutions. The article also discusses the challenges that online and distance learning may pose to the student-centered approach, the modern technologies that support the student-centered approach, and suggests ways to overcome these challenges. The role of technology in facilitating the student-centered approach in online and distance learning is analyzed in the article, along with recommendations and best practices for its implementation. The student-centered approach is gaining increasing attention and popularity as a means to address these issues and improve the quality of online and distance learning.

Introduction

The student-centered approach is a teaching and learning method that places the needs and interests of students at the center of the educational process. It emphasizes engagement, collaboration, and student autonomy, aiming to create a learning environment that supports, challenges, and aligns with students’ needs and goals. In his research, Khoury ( 2022 ) argues that this approach has a positive impact on student motivation, active engagement and improved learning outcomes, especially in online and distance learning settings.

Modern education strives for active learning, where students become the center of the educational process and develop their skills and competencies (Katawazai, 2021 ). However, the implementation of this concept is difficult due to various problems, including lack of infrastructure and limited resources. Despite this, the use of modern information technologies, especially distance learning, provides enormous opportunities for the application of this concept, where the teacher plays the role of a mentor, helping students develop learning motivation and stimulating their independent learning activities (Haleem et al., 2022 ; You, 2019 ). In the realm of education, there is a significant discourse surrounding the idea of prioritizing students in the learning process, involving them actively, and tailoring educational experiences to their needs and interests. Numerous studies, including those by Bakar et al. ( 2013 ), Neumann ( 2013a , b ), and Komatsu et al. ( 2021 ), explore diverse facets of this educational approach. These investigations delve into topics such as crafting learning environments that revolve around the learner and the hurdles faced when translating this concept into practical implementation.

Student-centered learning (SCL) involves active student participation in the educational process and the ability for students to choose what, when, where, and how they will learn. In the field of teaching statistics, there has been a rapid expansion in the use of SCL. However, despite this, there is a lack of research that synthesizes the results in this area, particularly in the context of computer technologies (Judi & Sahari, 2013 ). Schweisfurth ( 2015 ) emphasizes the importance of flexible learning methods, and (Oyelana et al., 2022 ) highlight active participation, individual attention and motivation. Research Lahdenperä et al. ( 2022 ) shows that teacher support and control of learning tasks promote regulated learning. Asoodeh et al. ( 2012 ) further confirm that a student-centered approach improves academic achievement and social skills. However, the successful implementation of this approach requires changes in the organization of the educational process and teacher training, as indicated in the study by Burner et al. ( 2017 ). At the same time Tadesse et al. ( 2021 ), Zhang et al. ( 2022 ) and Knorn et al. ( 2022 ) emphasize the importance of interactive and constructivist learning, providing a deeper understanding of the material.

Theoretical framework e-learning

A student-centered approach to e-learning involves orienting the educational process towards the needs and interests of students. This approach assumes that students actively participate in their own learning, define their learning goals, choose ways to achieve these goals, and independently assess their progress (Kumar & Owston, 2016 ). In the context of the accessibility of e-learning, a student-centered approach can be used to identify accessibility issues that cannot be automatically detected. In a student-centered e-learning environment, various tools and technologies are used to help students acquire knowledge in a more interactive and effective format (Santoso et al., 2016 ; Verstegen et al., 2016 ; Dolmans 2019 ; Rodrigues et al., 2019 ). For example, chats, forums, web conferences, online quizzes, and assignments allow students to communicate and collaborate with each other, exchange ideas, and receive feedback from teachers and fellow students (Serban & Vescan, 2019 ). Advanced methods, tools, and technologies are applied to create a SCL process on electronic platforms. Special attention is given to the use of machine learning methods and data analysis to personalize the educational process according to each student’s needs and level of knowledge. Santoso et al. ( 2018 ) also provide a description of the development and testing process of a control panel, which demonstrates that its use can improve the quality of learning in a student-centered e-learning environment.

Kerimbayev et al. ( 2022 ) investigated the implementation of the I-learning platform in the education system and emphasized the advantages of this innovative platform, which contributes to improving the quality of education and facilitating collaboration between teachers and students. The article also highlights the importance of integrating technology into education to enhance the quality of education and prepare students for modern employment requirements.

Methods and technologies of e-learning with a focus on a student-centered approach are described by Uskov et al. ( 2014 ), who discuss the creation of an individual electronic educational environment that can be tailored to the needs and knowledge level of each learner. The application of intelligent technologies to enhance student learning is emphasized. Various methods and approaches, such as adaptive learning, personalization of the educational process, the use of online courses, and other electronic tools, are employed. Faisal et al. ( 2019 ) propose the use of machine learning methods and data analysis to create personalized educational materials and improve interaction among students.

In the age of the Internet, traditional lectures are becoming less appealing to students, leading to a decrease in their motivation for learning and exam performance. However, widespread adoption of student-centered teaching methods aimed at addressing this issue faces certain obstacles, such as: (1) difficulties related to preparing materials for e-learning; (2) significant additional time required for active online communication with students; (3) resistance from students towards taking an active role in their education; (4) insufficient confidence of teachers that a student-centered approach covers all necessary topics. Dȩbiec ( 2017 ) describes a thematic study conducted in an introductory course on digital systems using a combination of student-oriented strategies to overcome the mentioned obstacles and improve students’ performance. Specific measures included: (1) improving student-teacher relationships; (2) using inductive and counterintuitive approaches to introduce new concepts; (3) the use of puzzle-based quizzes integrated with peer learning; (4) use of the audience response system; (5) replacing some lectures with educational programs; (6) reducing the course duration; and (7) utilizing a graphic tablet.

Student-centered e-learning involves the use of technologies that allow teachers and students to personalize learning, such as data analysis and adaptive learning. Courses are developed considering the interests and needs of students, which can enhance their motivation and learning efficiency. Student-centered e-learning also involves the use of interactive teaching methods such as assignments, cases, group discussions, and presentations, which enable students to actively participate in the learning process (Hermans et al., 2013 ). Student-centered e-learning helps ensure a high level of individualization in education and enhances learning effectiveness. As a result, students can receive quality education that meets their needs and helps them achieve their learning goals. It has been established that online courses require the application of more effective learner-centered teaching methods. This approach allowed students to choose assignments they prefer, including both traditional projects and more active actions such as demonstrations or skill mastery. To determine the extent to which these changes contributed to active learning, course data analysis was conducted. Students successfully completed assignments, demonstrating proficiency in various skills, and positively evaluated the flexible learning approach. Hanewicz et al. ( 2017 ) confirmed that using student-centered methods that consider their preferences is an effective approach for online courses.

Background: online learning

The impact of a student-centered approach to online learning on student satisfaction, particularly for those with limited experience in online education, has been studied. Researchers focus on constructs such as teacher-student interaction, active student participation in discussions and assignments, personalized learning, and others. Structural equation modeling was employed to test hypotheses regarding the influence of five key elements of SCL in online courses: learner relevance, active learning, authentic learning, student autonomy, and computer competency on students’ perception of satisfaction with online courses and distance learning (Ke & Kwak, 2013 ; Ribeiro-Silva et al., 2022 ). The results demonstrated that all five SCL structures significantly influenced student satisfaction with online courses and distance online learning.

To develop effective online courses, it is important to utilize research-backed principles and practices that are student-centered and can be theoretically justified and explained based on empirical data. It is crucial to identify evidence-based practices that have proven effective in attracting and retaining students in online courses (McCombs, 2015 ). Student-centered online environments serve as important tools for education in the modern world, providing students with access to educational materials anytime and anywhere, as well as offering a convenient and flexible learning format (Rayens & Ellis, 2018 ). Such an approach can improve the quality of learning and enhance student motivation, ultimately leading to more effective and successful education.

A personalized approach to online learning in higher education takes into account the individual cognitive and motivational characteristics of each student, unlike universal approaches that do not consider these differences. This allows for more effective enhancement of student motivation, self-esteem, self-efficacy, intrinsic values, and improves the quality of education and preparation for professional activities. However, the personalized approach may not have a significant impact on students’ course-related performance and task value. Data analysis can also provide more detailed information about students’ learning behavior and help develop further intervention strategies to improve the quality of education (Smit et al., 2014 ).

Smit et al. ( 2014 ; Figueiró & Raufflet, 2015 ) investigated the application of self-determination theory in establishing an educational setting centered around students. Their multilevel analysis revealed that students in this environment exhibited elevated levels of perceived autonomy, competence, relatedness, and motivation, gauged by their enjoyment and effort. When autonomy is granted within a nurturing context, a learner-focused approach can enhance student motivation.

Some higher education institutions are transitioning from a traditional teacher-led model to a student-centered model. However, this process is happening slowly due to the lack of clear instructions and trust in teachers. Yap ( 2016 ) investigated the challenges schools face in this process and the influence of a student-centered model. Various student-centered teaching methods have been examined, but insufficient attention has been given to what teachers themselves can do to achieve this model. Different technologies, such as online learning and multimedia, have been presented as supportive tools for this model. The study also presents a SCL model that includes key strategies and clear recommendations for teachers. The traditional teaching model was compared to multimedia and online learning in terms of their impact on student understanding and motivation, using pre-tests, post-tests, surveys, and student feedback (Bonnici et al., 2016 ) to inform how the modality and style of online learning can be improved and adapted to student needs.

Related work with distance learning

Currently, as virtual learning becomes increasingly popular and widely used in various fields, including education, it becomes important to ensure effective interaction between learners and technologies in virtual learning environments. To achieve this goal, a student-centered approach is necessary, which allows for individualizing the learning process, taking into account the needs and interests of each learner.

The interaction between learners and technologies in virtual learning environments is an important topic in the field of e-learning. It encompasses various aspects such as interfaces and usability, accessibility of materials, feedback and support, collaborative work and communication, as well as the ability to personalize and customize learning (Borba et al., 2018 ). Technologies used in virtual learning environments can impact the effectiveness of learning and stimulate active student engagement in the learning process. For example, modern technologies such as online forums, video conferences, and mobile applications can provide a more flexible and convenient environment for communication and collaboration among students and instructors. Chui et al. ( 2020 ) discuss the use of machine learning in virtual learning environments, specifically the creation of personalized learning plans for students. Machine learning algorithms can be used to analyze student data, such as test scores and system activity, and based on that, create individualized learning plans that take into account each student’s unique needs and abilities.

Kerimbayev et al. ( 2020 ) discussed the use of the learning management system (LMS) Moodle as a virtual educational environment to enhance interactive communication in education. The authors discussed the advantages of this approach in facilitating collaboration among students and instructors and improving overall education quality. The study demonstrated the effectiveness of LMS Moodle in creating an interactive and engaging learning environment.

Practical approaches to virtual learning environments in the context of distance learning and online education have been explored. Various aspects of virtual learning environments, including their definition, history, and evolution, the technologies used, learning models and methods, as well as research related to the effectiveness of virtual learning environments, have been discussed (Flavin & Bhandari, 2021 ). Different aspects of virtual learning, such as its effectiveness, accessibility, usability, and technological challenges, have been examined. Almarzooq et al. ( 2020 ) also discuss the advantages and disadvantages of virtual learning compared to traditional classroom-based learning, considering virtual learning as an effective tool for educating medical professionals both during the pandemic and in the long term.

Marín-Díaz et al. ( 2022 ) analyzed how universities transitioned to virtual learning, the technologies used, and how it impacted the educational process and student engagement. They also examined both the positive and negative aspects of virtual learning and discussed future development possibilities for virtual learning environments. To enhance student self-efficacy in virtual learning through mobile educational applications, Hussain et al. ( 2021 ) described key approaches to improving student self-efficacy in virtual learning using mobile apps and provided recommendations for their use. They also discussed the impact of mobile educational apps on improving students’ confidence in their knowledge, skills, and abilities, as well as increasing their motivation to learn.

The use of artificial intelligence technologies that explain decision-making in virtual learning environments to make learning more student-centered is also discussed. The principles underlying explainable artificial intelligence and the application of machine learning and data analysis methods to enhance student-virtual learning environment interaction (Alonso & Casalino, 2019 ; Laužikas & Miliūtė 2021 ). The role of explainable AI in improving assessment and providing feedback to students in virtual learning environments is also explored. This includes online courses, webinars, virtual classrooms, interactive textbooks, etc., which can involve both synchronous (real-time) and asynchronous (non-real-time) learning. Virtual learning can be beneficial for distance learning in blended learning programs that combine both traditional and virtual teaching methods (Jotsov et al., 2021 ). Numerous studies focus on the effectiveness of virtual learning and the optimization of teaching processes in virtual environments. Aslan and Duruhan ( 2021 ) conducted research on the impact of a virtual learning environment developed based on a problem-oriented approach to teaching on students’ academic performance, problem-solving skills, and motivation. The results showed that the use of problem-oriented virtual learning environments improved students’ academic performance, problem-solving skills, and motivation compared to traditional teaching approaches. Skalka et al. ( 2019 ) developed a system for automated assessment of programming skills using virtual learning environments. Their study compared the effectiveness of automated assessment with traditional manual assessment methods in programming education. The results showed that automated assessment using virtual learning environments was more effective than traditional manual assessment methods. This study highlights the potential of virtual learning environments for automated assessment and improving programming education.

It can be seen that the use of e-learning has increased significantly since 2012 and continues to grow (Fig.  1 ). Specifically, in 2023, the highest usage was recorded for “Virtual learning,“ followed by “Online learning” and “e-learning.“ Additionally, it is worth noting that the usage of “Virtual learning” reached its peak in 2023, while the usage of “Online learning” and “e-learning” continues to rise. Regarding scholarly articles, it can be inferred that the number of articles on this topic correlates with the popularity of these learning modalities. The highest number of articles was published in 2023, while the lowest was in 2013.

Growth and use of e-learning (Online learning, Virtual course of study, e-learning) from 2012 to 2023

This Table  1 provides a description and characteristics of three learning modalities: e-learning, online learning, and virtual course of study. It allows for comparing their differences, advantages, and features. For each learning modality, their main characteristics and distinctive features are provided. For example, e-learning involves the use of computer programs and can be both a standalone form of learning and a complement to tradition

Research gap and study objective

Currently, despite extensive scientific discussion, research issues related to the concept of a student-centered approach and the successful integration of student-centered educational tools when using various educational technologies in the context of e-learning remain the subject of active discussion and research. Several systematic reviews and meta-analyses have attempted to evaluate the effectiveness of a variety of educational technologies in creating learning environments that are tailored to students’ needs and interests. Shehata et al. ( 2023 ) conducted a systematic review of literature reviews to assess the current state of student-centered learning facilitated using educational technology. Ochôa and Wise ( 2021 ) discuss the role of student-centered analytics in supporting the digital transformation of education. Zhang et al. ( 2023 ) examine student-centered learning in the context of the case method and conduct an analysis of online and offline discussions within this teaching method. Shemshack and Spector ( 2020 ) conducted a systematic review of terminology associated with personalized learning. Yang et al. ( 2023 ) focused on student engagement in the context of emergency distance learning. Khaldi et al. ( 2023 ) conducted a systematic literature review on gamification in e-learning in higher education.

A study by Yang et al. ( 2018 ) evaluates the effectiveness of smart classrooms and highlights the importance of integrating technology into the teaching process. While the study by Peng et al. ( 2019 ) focuses on a personalized adaptive learning approach implemented using smart learning environments. Both of these studies are highly relevant for better understanding the impact of modern educational technologies on teaching methods and contribute to the creation of more personalized educational scenarios.

Conducted research Mustafa et al. ( 2023 ) examines the impact of gamification on students’ online learning behavior and academic performance, taking into account the perspective of learning analytics. Huang et al. ( 2023 ) work explores educators’ readiness to implement Online Merge Offline (OMO) learning in the context of digital transformation. At the same time, Topuz et al. ( 2022 ) considered current trends in online assessment systems in the context of an emergency transition to distance learning. Kerimbayev et al. ( 2023 ), is engaged in the development of computational thinking in online collaborative learning using educational robotics. Wang et al. ( 2022 ) examined the temporal aspect of gender differences in online learning behavior. These studies make important contributions to the understanding of various aspects of modern educational technologies and their impact on learning and teaching.

Research Objective: The aim of this study is to conduct a systematic literature review on the topic of “Student-Centered Approach and Modern Technologies in Distance Learning.“ The main objective is to analyze and summarize existing knowledge and research on this topic to identify key trends, advantages, limitations, and recommendations regarding the student-centered approach and the use of modern technologies in distance learning.

Research Questions:

To achieve the stated research objective, the following questions are formulated:

What research experience already exists in the field of the student-centered approach in distance learning?

What modern technologies are used in distance learning, and how are they related to the student-centered approach?

What are the advantages and limitations of implementing the student-centered approach and modern technologies in distance learning?

What recommendations can be derived from existing research for the effective implementation of the student-centered approach and modern technologies in distance learning?

The study will focus on seeking answers to these questions and providing a comprehensive literature review that will assist researchers, educators, and practitioners in the field of education to develop strategies and methods for the effective implementation of the student-centered approach and modern technologies in distance learning.

Methodology

Use of modern technologies.

The use of modern technologies in a student-centered approach in education is an important and promising area of research. Modern technologies, such as artificial intelligence, virtual reality, adaptive systems, and chatbots, can significantly enhance the educational process, making it more personalized, interactive, and effective.

One of the main advantages of using modern technologies in a student-centered approach is the ability to individualize learning. Adaptive learning technologies allow for the adaptation of educational materials and teaching methods to individual needs and preferences of each student. This facilitates more effective comprehension of the material, increases student motivation, and fosters interest in learning.

Furthermore, the use of modern technologies promotes active student engagement and the development of collaborative work. Virtual environments and tools enable students to collaborate, exchange ideas, solve problems together, and develop communication skills. This is particularly important in the context of collaborative learning, where students may be located in different places and interact virtually.

However, it is important to consider the limitations and challenges associated with the use of modern technologies in a student-centered approach. Firstly, accessibility and availability of technologies may be uneven, especially for students from less developed regions or social groups. This can create educational inequalities and exclude certain categories of students.

Secondly, effective use of technologies requires qualified educators who can appropriately integrate technologies into the learning process and provide support to students. A shortage of trained teachers may hinder the successful implementation of the student-centered approach.

Additionally, ethical and confidentiality issues related to the use of modern technologies in education should be taken into account. Collection and storage of student data, particularly in the context of using artificial intelligence, must adhere to high standards of security and confidentiality.

Several studies in the field of education and information technology have explored various aspects of technology integration in the educational process. One article examined the role of teachers, the internet, and technology in the education of the younger generation (Szymkowiak et al., 2021 ). Another study investigated students’ perceptions of e-learning platforms (Moodle, Microsoft Teams, and Zoom) in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic (Alameri et al., 2020 ; Gamage et al., 2022 ). Another research focused on bridging the digital divide and acquiring digital skills among elderly individuals (Blažič & Blažič, 2020 ). Influencing factors on the acceptance of mobile learning (m-learning) in higher education were explored in another article (Qashou, 2021 ). A review of digital transformation in education was presented in a study (Bilyalova et al., 2020 ). The use of artificial intelligence in higher education was investigated using structural equation modeling (Chatterjee & Bhattacharjee, 2020 ). Augmented and virtual reality technologies in anatomical education underwent a systematic review (Uruthiralingam & Rea, 2020 ). Overall, these studies reflect different aspects of information technology application in education and highlight the role of teachers, the internet, digital skills, and various technological platforms in student learning.

In Fig.  2 the use of various modern technologies in education is described. Each technology has its own advantages and contributes to the improvement of the learning process. The use of modern technologies in education has a significant impact on the educational process. Interactive e-textbooks offer engaging learning experiences, where students have access to up-to-date information and can instantly assess their knowledge. Web and video conferencing enable students to communicate remotely, participate in discussions, and engage in virtual lectures and seminars. Online learning platforms provide convenient access to educational materials and interactive tools, facilitating self-paced learning and knowledge assessment. Virtual laboratories allow for hands-on practical learning in a safe virtual environment, developing skills in working with technical devices and software. Mobile learning applications offer flexibility and accessibility to educational materials and assignments, allowing students to learn anywhere and anytime. Artificial intelligence and machine learning support personalized learning, automate assignment grading, and offer individual recommendations. Virtual and augmented reality create engaging and immersive educational environments, visualizing complex concepts and enabling practice of practical skills. The use of social networks fosters collaboration and knowledge sharing among students. All these modern technologies greatly enrich the educational process, making it more engaging, effective, and accessible for learners.

Utilization of modern technologies in education

Overall, the use of modern technologies in a student-centered approach opens up significant prospects for enhancing education. However, for successful implementation of this approach, it is necessary to consider limitations and challenges, develop effective implementation strategies, and provide appropriate support and training for the teaching staff. Only then can we fully leverage the potential of modern technologies in education and create more effective and SCL environments.

Research context and data coding

This article presents two methodological approaches to educational research, enriched by a coding scheme, which is a systematic method for analyzing and classifying data obtained from a study. These methodologies allow researchers to effectively analyze and interpret data to better understand various aspects of educational processes. A critical aspect of such analysis is the number of studies conducted within each of the identified methodological approaches. In quantitative studies that use a coding scheme, data are presented in numerical form and are coded according to predetermined parameters or criteria, including coding for level of education (primary, secondary, high school, college, postgraduate), as indicated in several reviews (e.g. Shehata et al., 2023 ; Bremner et al., 2022 ; Khaldi et al., 2023 ). Qualitative research using a coding scheme focuses on the analysis of qualitative data; researchers use a coding scheme to identify key themes, concepts, and categories in the collected data.

After collecting the sources, the content is analyzed and the information from different sources is synthesized to identify common trends and patterns in the chosen field. The literature review method can also include a critical evaluation of the selected sources to determine their credibility, reliability, and relevance.

In this study, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) (Page et al., 2021 ) methodology for systematic reviews was adopted to ensure a transparent process of developing the search strategy, defining inclusion criteria, and identifying relevant publications. Then, the AMSTAR 2 (Shea, 2017 ) critical appraisal strategy was applied to assess the quality of the publications.

The protocol for a systematic literature review on student-centered approach and modern distance learning technologies, based on the PRISMA methodology and AMSTAR 2 critical appraisal strategy, includes the following steps:

Defining the research question and developing a publication search strategy in databases, considering existing systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

Assessing the quality and relevance of publications based on pre-established inclusion and exclusion criteria.

Extracting data from selected publications and conducting a qualitative synthesis of the obtained results.

Evaluating the quality of the data using the AMSTAR 2 critical appraisal strategy and preparing a corresponding quality assessment report.

The search strategy

In our systematic search strategy, we utilized the most relevant terms and synonyms that encompass the key concepts of this study, which were identified based on previous systematic reviews.

We define scientific data as the obtained factual material, generally accepted in the study of distance learning problems and which, due to its data quality, makes it possible to validate them, as well as reproduce research. For study reproducibility, the full search string can be specified. Example of search and substring strings used (search/substring//substring): “student centered approach”/“student centered approach definition”//“student centered approach meaning”; “modern technologies in distance learning”/“latest technology in online learning”//“emerging technologies in distance education”; “online learning”/“online education”//“online teaching”; “virtual learning”/“virtual learning environment”//“virtual education”; “e-learning”/“e-learning platform”//“e-learning in education”, et al.

We conducted an information search on the Internet not only using a short search summary of the document (bibliography), but also the full text. It should be noted that the distinctive feature of such systems is less formalization of the request, simplicity and clarity of the search engine.

Based on their reputation for comprehensive coverage of literature in the field of student-centered approaches to education and feedback research, we chose Web of Science and Scopus as the most relevant databases for our search queries.

Inclusion criteria

During the initial stage of literature review, we applied three main inclusion and exclusion criteria. We included only studies published in English, as the majority of research publications in this field are written in English. We also included publications published from 2012 to 2023. Finally, to ensure the originality, credibility, and quality of the selected publications, we included only peer-reviewed articles published in scientific journals.

During the second stage of screening, we selected only empirical research studies. Conceptual studies were excluded from our analysis.

Identification of relevant publications

During the screening process, a total of 688 articles were identified from the selected databases (Web of Science—187, Scopus—288, other sources—213). After removing 385 duplicates in the first stage of screening, the number of articles was reduced to 303. Subsequently, in the second stage of screening, we analyzed the titles and abstracts according to our inclusion criteria. Out of these 303 articles, 260 did not meet our criteria and were excluded from further analysis, resulting in a final set of 43 articles. These 43 articles were included in the quality assessment. Figure  3 illustrates the stages of our screening and selection process.

Flowchart of the process of identification and selection of studies in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines

Quality assessment

We used the quality assessment criteria proposed by Shea ( 2017 ) within the framework of AMSTAR 2. These criteria are based on a study conducted to assess the quality of both quantitative and qualitative research. The quality assessment criteria were evaluated at four levels: high, moderate, low, and critically low.

The results of the quality assessment of the 43 systematic reviews conducted using the AMSTAR tool are provided in Additional file 1 : Appendix 1. Among them, 10 were assessed as low quality (AMSTAR score 0–6), 19 as moderate quality (7–11 points), and 10 as high quality (12–16 points). It is worth noting that no conflicts of interest were identified in any of the included studies or the systematic reviews.

The Table  2 presents the main materials and methods used in the student-centered approach to online learning. Each column corresponds to a specific aspect of this approach, and the rows represent various methods and materials used to achieve personalized and engaging learning. The table includes the following categories: “Personalized Content,“ “Interactive Lessons,“ “Flexible Schedule,“ “Collaborative Learning,“ and “Continuous Assessment.“ This table provides a summary and systematic organization of information about the methods that help create a more effective and individually oriented educational environment for students.

These materials and methods contribute to the creation of online learning that is learner-centered, flexible, engaging, and effective. By employing a student-centered approach, online learning can become a valuable tool for students to acquire new skills and knowledge and fully unleash their potential.

The systematic literature review revealed that the student-centered approach and modern technologies play a significant role in distance learning. Numerous studies confirm that the student-centered approach promotes active student engagement in the learning process and enhances their motivation to learn. It also contributes to the development of self-regulated learning and critical thinking skills among students.

Dunbar and Yadav ( 2022 ) analyzed the effects of implementing a summer educational program involving students through service learning on the transition to SCL. The work by Rapanta ( 2021 ) explored the potential of integrating a dialogic argumentation method, oriented towards students, in various subject areas. The report by Grammens et al. ( 2022 ) presents a systematic review of the roles and competencies of teachers in synchronous online learning using video conferencing technologies. Ashiru et al. ( 2022 ) presented a student-centered approach to studying the choice of business education programs at the university level. A study by Muller and Mildenberger ( 2021 ) provides a systematic review of blended learning in higher education, aimed at providing flexible learning by replacing some face-to-face time with online environments. Lastly, Bremner et al. ( 2022 ) research presents a systematic review of the outcomes of student-centered pedagogy. These works contribute to understanding the effectiveness and benefits of SCL in various educational contexts.

In recent years, virtual learning has significantly expanded its use and overtaken e-learning, becoming the second most popular form of learning after online learning. This indicates the growing popularity of virtual learning and its importance in the modern educational context. According to the data in Fig.  4 , e-learning was used in 21%, virtual learning in 37%, and online learning in 42%. This diagram provides information about the distribution of different forms of education and helps understand which forms are the most popular and in demand in the educational environment.

Frequency of use of various forms of education

In recent years, numerous studies have been conducted on the use of virtual educational tools and technologies. For example, Kerimbayev ( 2016 ) research explores the possibilities and implementation of virtual learning, providing insights into its advantages, challenges, and significance in modern education. The study contributes to a better understanding of virtual learning environments and their impact on teaching and learning processes. Radianti et al. ( 2020 ) contribute to understanding virtual educational environments and their application in various areas of learning and education. These studies deepen our understanding of virtual educational environments and their influence on teaching and learning processes in different fields of education.

Aull ( 2020 ) examines student-centered assessment and feedback on written assignments in the online environment. Cavalcanti et al. ( 2021 ) conduct a systematic review of automatic feedback in the online learning environment.

There are also studies addressing artificial intelligence and its application in online education, such as the research conducted by Ouyang et al. ( 2022 ). Other studies in this list examine online entrepreneurship education, the impact of online learning on students with cognitive impairments, as well as the challenges associated with the online component of blended learning and the issues faced by teachers in the online environment (e.g., works by Rasheed et al., 2020 ; Martin et al., 2020 ). The study by Juliantara et al. ( 2022 ) focuses on student-related factors in online learning.

Saleem et al. ( 2022 ) provides a literature review on the application of gamification in e-learning. Giannakos et al. ( 2022 ) conduct a systematic literature review, exploring the potential of e-learning to enhance organizational learning.

The overall trend in these studies indicates the importance of a student-centered approach, the use of various technologies and tools, as well as the development of students’ skills and competencies in online learning. They also emphasize the significance of feedback, collaboration, and flexibility in the online environment.

In general, these studies provide valuable information and recommendations for the development and implementation of student-centered online learning. They also underscore the importance of continuous improvement and the application of new approaches and technologies in this field.

In relation to the use of modern technologies in distance learning, research also highlights the importance of developing information and communication skills among students. It has been shown that the use of technologies can contribute to the development of collaborative learning, online processing, and other forms of active interaction among students. Online learning also enables students to receive feedback and support from their teachers and peers.

The presented diagram is the result of a synthesis of literature analysis, based on the analysis of a number of studies conducted in the field of distance education, taking into account the use of modern technological solutions (Fig.  5 ). This literature review provides a quantitative assessment of academic work on each of the identified technologies and provides valuable insight into the direction and scope of research in the field.

Analysis of the number of studies in the field of modern technologies in distance education

The learner-centered approach to education has been investigated by several researchers, and the results of these studies show that such an approach can take various forms and be individually determined. Furthermore, significant differences in the key findings of these studies have been identified. Kang and Keinonen ( 2018 ) examine the influence of different learner-centered approaches on students’ interest and achievements in the field of science, emphasizing their positive impact on the learning process. Zhang et al. ( 2021 ) explore factors related to the implementation of learner-centered teaching methods, revealing the challenges and difficulties faced by educators. However, overall, the learner-centered approach is considered more effective and appropriate in informal learning settings as it allows students to develop their skills and knowledge, taking into account their individual needs and interests.

The diagram represents various student-centered methodologies related to education and indicates the number of studies conducted in each of these methodologies (Fig.  6 ). The types of methodologies include the development of artificial intelligence in virtual education, assessment and development in student-oriented e-learning environments, literature review studies, student-centered case method in online and offline modes, quantitative research on the impact of SCL, development of learner-centered pedagogy, systematic review of student-centered pedagogy, and the creation of a student-centered online learning environment.

Methodology and amount of research in education

From the presented data, it can be observed that the number of publications indexed in the Scopus and Web of Science databases is unevenly distributed across years (Fig.  7 ). In 2012, Scopus registered more articles than Web of Science. In the subsequent years, the situation changed, and in 2014, Scopus registered significantly more articles than Web of Science. In 2020, the number of publications in both databases was substantial, but Scopus still surpasses Web of Science. Overall, it can be concluded that the number of publications in Scopus and Web of Science is unstable and can vary from year to year.

Publications in Scopus and Web of Science by years (2012–2023)

However, the systematic literature review also identified some challenges and limitations associated with the implementation of student-centered approaches and modern technologies in distance learning. Some studies highlight the need for more effective training of teachers in technology use and the application of student-centered approaches. It is also noted that individual needs and differences of students should be taken into account when designing and implementing educational programs.

Overall, the systematic literature review confirms the significance of student-centered approaches and modern technologies in distance learning. It emphasizes their positive impact on student engagement, the development of self-regulation and critical thinking skills, as well as the creation of conditions for more flexible and personalized education. However, for the effective implementation of these approaches and technologies, further work is required in terms of teacher training, program adaptation, and providing support to students in the online learning environment.

Thus, the findings of the systematic literature review confirm that student-centered approaches and modern technologies play an important role in distance learning. They contribute to active student participation, educational individualization, and the development of necessary skills. However, further work is needed for the effective implementation of these approaches and technologies in educational practice.

The results of the study confirmed that there is considerable experience in the field of distance learning in applying a student-centered approach. Modern technologies such as interactive platforms, adaptive learning systems and virtual reality are closely related to this approach. The advantages of introducing a student-centered approach and modern technologies are the individualization of learning, improved interaction and accessibility of education. However, limitations include the need for access to technology and the difficulty of adapting traditional models to a remote format. For effective implementation, it is recommended to ensure the availability of technology, integrate a student-centered approach, organize interaction and support for students, and conduct ongoing research on the effectiveness of implementation.

This section discusses the relationship between the student-centered approach and the use of modern technologies in distance learning based on the conducted systematic literature review. It assesses the advantages and challenges associated with implementing such an approach in the context of distance learning and discusses the prospects for its development and recommendations for practice.

In this study, various works related to the topic of student-centered approaches and modern technologies in distance learning were examined. The study by Wang and Zhang ( 2019 ) explores the relationship between the student-centered approach, deep learning, and self-assessment of skill improvement among higher education students in China. The work by Xie et al. ( 2020 ) and Yin et al. ( 2021 ) examines motivation, engagement, and academic achievement of students in the context of an inquiry-based approach. Chen and Tsai ( 2021 ) delve into the utilization of mobile technologies in education and teachers’ perceptions of this approach. Brouwer et al. ( 2019 ) explore interaction and a sense of belonging within learning environments that prioritize learners. Cheng and Ding ( 2021 ) make a comparison between the behavior and motivation of Chinese teachers and students in this educational context. Al-Balushi et al. ( 2020 ) examine teachers’ and their supervisors’ perceptions of student-centered classrooms and the learning process. Overall, these works enrich our understanding of the impact of the student-centered approach and the use of modern technologies in distance learning on student motivation, interaction, and achievement.

In addition to the previous works, the following studies related to the topic of student-centered approaches in education have also been explored. Polly et al. ( 2015 ) examine the relationship between teacher professional development, their outcomes, and student achievement using a mathematics program for elementary school teachers as an example. Marioara ( 2015 ) discusses the changes in education associated with the implementation of a student-centered approach. The work by Rich ( 2021 ) investigates teacher agency when using mathematical instructional programs and their impact on SCL. Haber-Curran and Tillapaugh ( 2015 ) examine transformative learning with an emphasis on a student-centered approach in leadership education. Frambach et al. ( 2014 ) study student behavior in discussions in student-centered education across different cultures. Baeten et al. ( 2013 ) explore student-centered teaching methods and their impact on students’ approaches to learning in higher professional education. Adam et al. ( 2017 ) conduct a systematic review of self-regulated learning and online learning. Aytaç and Kula ( 2020 ) perform a meta-analysis of studies on the impact of student-centered approaches on the development of students’ creative thinking. Finally, Metsälä and Törnroos ( 2021 ) conduct a literature review on the benefits and effectiveness of student-centered strategies in healthcare education. These works provide additional scientific evidence for the significance of the student-centered approach in modern education and its impact on student learning and development.

Baeten et al. ( 2010 ) examine the use of SCL environments to stimulate deep approaches to learning. Bower and Hedberg ( 2010 ) conduct a quantitative multimodal analysis of teaching and learning discourse in a web-conferencing environment and assess the effectiveness of student-centered learning-based designs. Hew and Cheung ( 2014 ) investigate the motivation and issues faced by students and instructors in Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs). Rabin et al. ( 2019 ) conduct an empirical study on the antecedents of achievement of student-centered outcomes in MOOCs. Cela et al. ( 2015 ) explore social network analytics in e-learning. Chen et al. ( 2021 ) conduct a systematic review of technology adoption in online and blended entrepreneurial education. Cinquin et al. ( 2019 ) investigate online learning and cognitive impairments. Garcia et al. ( 2018 ) conduct a systematic review of self-regulated learning using electronic tools in computer science education. Wong et al. ( 2015 ) describe a model for integrating learning management systems, MOOCs, and flipped classrooms in an integrated Moodle learning system. Harris et al. ( 2013 ) provide a literature review confirming the significant impact of student-centered schools on learning. Hernández-Velázquez et al. ( 2021 ) conduct a systematic review of literature on the relationship between mobile learning and student-centered design. Margot and Kettler ( 2019 ) review teachers’ perceptions of integration and education in STEM fields. Marín ( 2022 ) critically analyzes SCL in higher education during the COVID-19 pandemic. Mousavinasab et al. ( 2021 ) conduct a systematic review of intelligent learning systems, their characteristics, applications, and assessment methods. O’Donnell et al. ( 2017 ) present a systematic review of personalized approaches to studying traumatic events. Rukmini et al. ( 2018 ) conduct a meta-analysis and systematic literature review on student-centered learning and its relationship with academic achievement and soft skills. Shah and Kumar ( 2020 ) present concepts of student-centered learning.

Student-centered teaching strategies are approaches to education that emphasize the needs and interests of students rather than the requirements of the curriculum or the teacher. These strategies take into account individual differences among students, their cultural and social context, and different learning styles. They help students develop critical thinking, self-esteem, and self-regulation (Andersen & Andersen 2017 ). However, research shows that student-centered teaching strategies may have a negative impact on the academic performance of students from different socioeconomic backgrounds. Therefore, for the effective implementation of student-centered teaching strategies, it is necessary to consider the context of their application and provide the necessary support and resources to students so that they can successfully meet their educational needs and goals.

The advantages of a student-centered approach and the use of modern technologies in distance learning include:

Student motivation: The student-centered approach and modern technologies allow creating interactive and attractive educational environments that stimulate the interest and motivation of students. This promotes active student participation in the learning process.

Individualized learning: Through the use of modern technologies and a student-centered approach, educators can adapt educational materials and methodologies to meet the individual needs and proficiency levels of each student. This allows us to provide personalized support and ensure optimal conditions for the learning and development of each student.

Flexibility in learning: Distance learning with the use of modern technologies allows students to study at their own time and location, providing flexibility in organizing the learning process. This is particularly important for students who have other commitments, such as work or family.

Development of digital literacy skills: The use of modern technologies in distance learning contributes to the development of digital literacy skills among students. They gain experience working with various digital tools and resources, which is crucial for their future professional endeavors.

Feedback and assessment: Modern technologies enable teachers to provide more frequent and precise feedback to students. Automated assessment systems can also be employed, allowing for more objective evaluation of students’ knowledge and skills.

The advantages of a student-centered approach and modern technologies in distance learning contribute to more effective and personalized education, meeting students’ needs, and improving learning outcomes. Students engaged in a student-centered educational environment using modern technologies can develop skills in independent work, critical thinking, collaboration, and communication. This helps them better grasp the learning material and apply it in practical contexts.

Due to the individualization of learning and flexibility in organizing the learning process, students can develop their strengths, overcome challenging moments, and achieve better results. Educational materials and assignments can be adapted to their needs and interests, promoting deeper understanding and retention of the material.

Moreover, a student-centered approach and modern technologies allow teachers to gain a more accurate understanding of each student’s progress and respond to their needs and difficulties in real-time. This contributes to more effective student support and enhances the quality of education.

Overall, the advantages of a student-centered approach and modern technologies in distance learning include increased motivation, personalized learning, flexibility, development of digital literacy skills, and improved feedback and assessment. These advantages contribute to higher-quality education and better achievement of students’ learning goals.

Restrictions

During the process of reviewing and addressing research questions, this study identified several limitations. The vast amount of published articles can lead to the omission of some relevant works, which is a common challenge in literature reviews. Significant effort is required when constructing search queries and determining keywords to ensure the success of the search process. The method of identifying keywords in this study relied on the “snowballing” process to uncover related reflections and keywords associated with the research topic. However, the limited timeframe may have resulted in the exclusion of certain articles or combinations of keywords, potentially leading to the omission of relevant information.

Furthermore, it should be noted that this study has its own limitations related to the selected criteria for inclusion. For example, it focused only on the analysis of journal articles in the English language. Consequently, works written in other languages or unpublished in journals may have been excluded from consideration.

Overall, despite the aforementioned limitations, this study provides important findings in the examined research area. To achieve a more comprehensive understanding of the topic and account for the limitations, it is recommended to consider these factors when planning and conducting future research.

Recommendation for further research

Our research has revealed the absence of a widely accepted conceptual framework for the components to consider when developing a student-centered approach and using modern technologies in distance learning. In the future, research could focus on exploring the components involved in various student-centered approach systems and modern distance learning technologies, and establishing common principles and terminology to create a unified approach and definition. It is important to note that this concept will evolve as our understanding of human psychology and the development of new technologies expand. Al-Ansi’s ( 2022 ) study examines the strengthening of student-centered learning through social e-learning and assessment. Rotar’s ( 2022 ) work proposes a framework for implementing student support in the online learning cycle. These studies contribute significantly to understanding the effectiveness and applicability of these approaches and technologies in distance learning, offering new ideas and recommendations for future research.

Additionally, the emphasis on developing higher-order thinking skills has not received sufficient attention in the existing literature. To address this gap, attention can be given to the development of higher-order thinking skills in the context of a student-centered learning environment. Future research can also focus on implementing these skills using a student-centered approach and modern technologies, including the potential application of virtual reality, while considering ethical and confidentiality issues.

Furthermore, conducting a detailed investigation to analyze existing platforms and systems of student-centered approaches and modern technologies in distance learning is necessary to determine which systems work best for different purposes and needs. This will help identify best practices and select the most effective learning systems.

This systematic literature review examined the impact of a student-centered approach and modern technologies on distance learning. The analysis of the presented studies allows for the following conclusions.

Firstly, a student-centered approach plays a crucial role in the effectiveness of distance learning. Considering students’ needs and preferences, as well as actively involving them in the learning process, contributes to increased motivation and better outcomes. The use of personalized approaches, adaptive technologies and tools, as well as feedback, helps create a learning environment tailored to each student’s individual needs.

Secondly, modern technologies play an important role in the development of distance learning. They provide access to educational resources, create interactive and collaborative environments, and enable the use of gamification and virtual reality in education. Tools such as electronic platforms, online communication, cloud technologies, and data analytics facilitate the effective delivery of materials, interaction between students and instructors, and adaptation of the educational process to changing needs.

Lastly, the student-centered approach and modern technologies in distance learning are interconnected and mutually reinforcing. The combination of these approaches allows for the creation of effective and innovative learning environments that promote active and interactive student engagement. They provide flexibility, accessibility, and personalization of learning, which are particularly relevant in the context of distance learning.

Overall, the systematic literature review allows for the conclusion that a student-centered approach and modern technologies play a significant role in enhancing the quality of distance learning. They contribute to active student engagement, personalization of the educational process, and the creation of an interactive learning environment. However, successful implementation of this approach requires consideration of the diversity of student needs and overcoming associated limitations. Therefore, further research and development in this field will contribute to the continued advancement of distance learning and the provision of quality education for students.

The student-centered approach includes the active involvement of students in the educational process, taking into account their needs and preferences, as well as the development of self-regulation and autonomy skills. It focuses on individualizing learning and supporting students in their educational journey. Modern technologies, in turn, provide a wide range of tools and resources for creating interactive and adaptive educational environments, ensuring accessibility and convenience in learning.

The use of modern technologies such as electronic platforms, virtual classrooms, multimedia materials, and communication tools enables the creation of an effective and flexible educational environment. They enrich learning by making it more interactive and engaging for students. They also facilitate personalized learning, allowing students to choose their own time and pace of learning.

However, for the full implementation of the student-centered approach and effective use of modern technologies in distance learning, it is necessary to consider limitations and challenges. This includes ensuring technology accessibility for all students, the quality of educational content, support and training for instructors in technology use, as well as organizational and managerial aspects.

Availability of data and materials

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Acknowledgements

The study was carried out within the framework of the project number AP19676457 by the Science Committee of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Republic of Kazakhstan.

Not applicable.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

al-Farabi Kazakh National University, Almaty, Kazakhstan

Nurassyl Kerimbayev, Zhanat Umirzakova & Vladimir Jotsov

Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China

Rustam Shadiev

University of Library Studies and Information Technologies, Sofia City, Bulgaria

Vladimir Jotsov

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zhanat Umirzakova .

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval and consent to participate.

Not applicable, because this research does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Consent for publication

Informed consent.

No human participants were involved in the scope of this study.

Competing interests

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Additional file 1: appendix 1., rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Kerimbayev, N., Umirzakova, Z., Shadiev, R. et al. A student-centered approach using modern technologies in distance learning: a systematic review of the literature. Smart Learn. Environ. 10 , 61 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-023-00280-8

Download citation

Received : 19 July 2023

Accepted : 10 November 2023

Published : 15 November 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-023-00280-8

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Student-centered approach
• Distance learning
• Online learning
• Virtual learning

Advertisement

Distance education research: a review of the literature

• Published: 12 April 2011
• Volume 23 , pages 124–142, ( 2011 )

Cite this article

• Michael Simonson 1 ,
• Charles Schlosser 1 &
• Anymir Orellana 1  

5669 Accesses

94 Citations

Explore all metrics

Distance education is defined, the various approaches for effective research are summarized, and the results of major research reviews of the field are explained in this article. Additionally, two major areas of research are included—research on barriers to the adoption of distance education and research summaries that explain and support best practices in the field. This paper concludes with the summary statement that it is not different education, it is distance education ; what is known about effectiveness in education is most often also applicable to distance education.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Distance Education and Technology Infrastructure: Strategies and Opportunities

Distance Learning

Towards a Unified Concept of Distance Learning

Explore related subjects.

• Artificial Intelligence
• Digital Education and Educational Technology

Adams, E., & Freeman, C. (2003). Selecting tools for online communities: Suggestions for learning technologists. The Technology Source. Available online at http://ts.mivu.org/default.asp?show+article&id=994 .

Berg, G. A. (2001). Distance learning best practices debate. WebNet Journal , 5–7 .

Berge, Z., & Muilenburg, L. (2000). Barriers to distance education as perceived by managers and administrators: Results of a survey. In M. Clay (Ed.), Distance learning administration annual 2000 . Baltimore, MD: University of Maryland.

Google Scholar  

Campbell, D., & Stanley, J. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research . Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

Chen, B. (2009). Barriers to adoption of technology-mediated distance education in higher-education institutions. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 10 (4), 333–338.

Clark, R. E. (1983). Reconsidering research on learning from media. Review of Educational Research, 53 (4), 445–459.

Finn, J. (1953). Professionalizing the audiovisual field. Audio-Visual Communication Review, 1 (1), 6–17.

Foley, M. (2003). The global development learning network: A World Bank initiative in distance learning for development. In M. G. Moore & W. G. Anderson (Eds.), Handbook of distance education . Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Foreman, J. (2003). Distance learning and synchronous interaction. The Technology Source. Available online at http://ts.mivu.org/default.asp?show+article&id=1042 .

Garon, J. (2002). A new future for distance education. Interface Tech News. Available online at http://www.interfacenow.com/syndicatepro/displayarticle.asp?ArticleID=180 .

Graham, C., Cagiltay, K., Lim, B-R., Craner, J., & Duffy, T. M. (2001). Seven principles of effective teaching: A practical lens for evaluating online courses. The Technology Source. Available online at http://technologysource.org/article/seven_principles_of_effective_teaching/ .

Hanna, D. E., Glowacki-Dudka, M., & Conceicao-Runlee, S. (2000). 147 practical tips for teaching online groups: Essentials for Web-based education . Madison, WI: Atwood.

Hirumi, A. (2000). Chronicling the challenges of web-basing a degree program: A systems perspective. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 1 (2), 89–108.

Hirumi, A. (2005). In search of quality: An analysis of e-learning guidelines and specifications. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 6 (4), 209–330.

Holmberg, B. (1987). The development of distance education research. The American Journal of Distance Education, 1 (3), 16–23.

Article   Google Scholar  

Howell, S., & Baker, K. (2006). Good (best) practices for electronically offered degree and certificate programs: A ten-year retrospect. Distance Learning, 3 (1), 41–47.

Keegan, D. (1996). Foundations of distance education (3rd ed.). London, UK: Routledge.

Ko, S., & Rossen, S. (2010). Teaching online: A practical guide (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

Kulik, C., Bangert, R., & Williams, G. (1983). Effects of computer-based teaching on secondary school students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75 , 19–26.

Kulik, C., Kulik, J., & Cohen, P. (1979). Research on audio-tutorial instruction: A meta-analysis of comparative studies. Research in Higher Education, 11 (4), 321–341.

Kulik, C., Kulik, J., & Cohen, P. (1980). Instructional technology and college teaching. Teaching of Psychology, 7 (4), 199–205.

Lou, Y., Bernard, R., & Abrami, P. (2006). Undergraduate distance education: A theory-based meta-analysis of the literature. Educational Technology Research and Development, 54 (2), 141–176.

Moore, M. G. (1998). Introduction. In C. C. Gibson (Ed.), Distance learners in higher education: Institutional responses for quality outcomes . Madison, WI: Atwood.

Moore, M., & Kearsley, G. (2005). Distance education: A systems view (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Orellana, A., Hudgins, T., & Simonson, M. (2009). The perfect online course . Charlotte, NC: Information Age.

Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (2003). The virtual student: A profile and guide to working with online learners . San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Peters, O. (1998). Learning and teaching in distance education: Pedagogical analyses and interpretations in an international perspective . London: Kogan Page.

Peters, O. (2002). Distance education in transition: New trends and challenges. Bibliotheks- und Informations sytem der Universitat Oldenburg.

Ronsisvalle, T., & Watkins, R. (2005). Student success in online K-12 education. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 6 (2), 117–124.

Schlosser, C., & Burmeister, M. (1999). The best of both worlds. TechTrends, 43 (5), 45–48.

Schlosser, L. A., & Simonson, M. (2009). Distance education: Definition and glossary of terms (3rd ed.). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.

Simonson, M. (2000). Myths and distance education: What the research says and does not say. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 1 (4), 277–279.

Simonson, M. (2001). Connecting the schools: Final evaluation report . North Miami Beach, FL: Nova Southeastern University. Available online at http://www.tresystems.com/projects/sdakota.cfgm .

Simonson, M. (2009a). Distance learning. In The 2009 book of the year (p. 231). Chicago: Encyclopaedia Britannica.

Simonson, M. (2009b). Scientific rigor. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 10 (4), vii–viii.

Simonson, M. (2012). Teaching and learning at a distance: Foundations of Distance Education. Boston, MA: Pearson.

Sloan, C. (2002). Practice: Comparing the cost - effectiveness of online versus traditional classroom cost per student pass rates . Available online at http://www.aln.org/effective/details5.asp?CE_ID=21 .

Smith, B., Benne, K., Stanley, W., & Anderson, A. (1951). Readings in the social aspects of education . Danville, IL: Interstate.

Sorensen, C., & Baylen, D. (2000). Perception versus reality: Views of interaction in distance education. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 1 (1), 45–58.

Sorensen, C., & Baylen, D. (2004). Learning online: Adapting the seven principles of good practice to a web-based instructional environment. Distance Learning, 1 (1), 7–17.

Tallent-Runnels, M., Cooper, S., Lan, W., Thomas, J., & Busby, C. (2005). How to teach online: What the research says. Distance Learning, 2 (1), 21–34.

Tallent-Runnels, M., Thomas, J., Lan, W., Cooper, S., Ahern, T., Shaw, S., et al. (2006). Teaching courses online: A review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 76 (1), 93–135.

U.S. Department of Education, Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development. (2009). Evaluation of evidence — based practices in online learning: A meta - analysis and review of online learning studies . Washington, DC. ( www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/opepd?ppss?reports.html ).

Zawacki-Richter, O. (2009). Research areas in distance education: A Delphi study. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 10 (3).

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Fischler School of Education and Human Services, Nova Southeastern University, 1750 NE 167th Street, North Miami Beach, FL, 33162, USA

Michael Simonson, Charles Schlosser & Anymir Orellana

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael Simonson .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Simonson, M., Schlosser, C. & Orellana, A. Distance education research: a review of the literature. J Comput High Educ 23 , 124–142 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-011-9045-8

Download citation

Published : 12 April 2011

Issue Date : December 2011

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-011-9045-8

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Distance education
• Literature review
• Equivalency theory
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Open Praxis

• Download PDF (English) XML (English)
• Alt. Display

Research articles

Challenges faced by adult learners in online distance education: a literature review.

• Mehmet Kara
• Fatih Erdoğdu
• Mehmet Kokoç
• Kursat Cagiltay

Although online distance education provides adult learners with an opportunity for life-long learning, there are still factors challenging them to engage in educational processes. The purpose of this study is to explore the challenges faced by adult learners in online distance education through the analysis of the relevant literature. The articles (N=36) published in the key journals in the fields of open and distance education, instructional technology, and adult education were reviewed and analyzed through constant comparative analysis in the current study. The findings reveal that adult learners have challenges related to internal, external, and program-related factors indicating the interrelated nature of these challenges. The findings also show that the challenges experienced by adult learners vary depending on their age, gender, knowledge and skills as well as the context in which they study. The findings of this study, which has an exploratory nature, have several implications for distance education stakeholders such as administrators, instructors, instructional designers, and policy makers.

• online distance education
• adult learners

Introduction

It is clearly known that distance education provides adult learners with the advantage of life-long learning due to its flexibility. Distance education is defined as the planned teaching and learning activities provided through the use of a communication channel within an institutional organization without any time and place limitations (Moore & Kearsley, 2011 , p. 2). With the widespread adoption of the Internet and online tools as the communication medium, online distance education empowered the flexibility of educational opportunities. Considering the advantages of online distance education, adults compose the largest audience for online distance education (Ke & Xie, 2009 ; Lim, 2001 ) and consequently the limits of the diversity expand in online distance education practices. Specifically, they display significant differences from traditional students in terms of their academic, psychological, and life characteristics (Richardson & King, 1998 ). Besides, their engagement in education is more irregular and varied compared with the traditional ones (McGivney, 2004 ). This variation and irregularity is due to the fact that they mostly continue their education with their work and family responsibilities. With all these in mind, adult learners’ unique characteristics cause unique challenges for them, which affect the way they continue their education or participate in online distance educational processes.

Adult Learning

Adult learners have distinct characteristics in comparison to traditional students. Firstly, they are aware of why and what they need to learn (Knowles, 1996 ). It is also known that the adult learners, who have diverse educational background and goals, want to reflect their experiences on their educational process (Lindeman, 2015 ). They are different from other learners in terms of their responsibilities in their daily lives, which influence their educational experience (Cercone, 2008 ). For this reason, there is a need for an educational environment where adult learners are allowed to determine their own educational processes; to share their ideas comfortably; and to sustain their educational process alongside their private lives. Thus, online distance education environment offers appropriate opportunities through the flexibility it provides for adult learners, who are aware of their own learning responsibilities and are required to manage their own learning processes.

In spite of the increase in the number of adult learners and consequently in the diversity of the students in online distance education, the number of the studies related to them are fewer in the literature than those studies about traditional learners (Chu & Tsai, 2009 ; Ke, 2010 ; Remedios & Richardson, 2013 ). Adult learners can be classified as young and older adults depending on their ages. However, adult learner can be defined as the ones who continue their education by balancing their family and work and are generally older than 22 (Kahu, Stephens, Leach & Zepke, 2013 ) and these characteristics makes them quite different from traditional learners. Although these differences might provide adult learners with some advantages in educational processes, they might lead to various challenges as well. As a consequence, these point out the need to plan educational environments and processes in accordance with these learners’ characteristics.

Adult Learners in Online Distance Education

Considering the learner-centered nature of all instructional design models, it is a necessity to design and implement online distance education programs that meet the needs of diverse learners including adults. This requires a sound understanding of the link between adult learners’ characteristics and the appropriateness of the online environments for their online experiences.

Learners can manage learning processes wherever and whenever they desire through the online learning environments. Additionally, adult learners have an opportunity to engage in more interaction via the tools (e.g. discussion and chat) offered by online learning environments (Kim, Liu & Bonk, 2005 ). By this way, they can develop virtual teaming skills and control their own learning processes (Kim, Liu, & Bonk, 2005 ). Interaction is also considered as a key factor in online distance education and it is a good predictor of learning (Picciano, 2002 ). Online distance education also provides an opportunity for learners to engage in individualized instruction and thus learning processes can be planned in harmony with their characteristics (Means, Toyama, Murphy, Bakia & Jones, 2009 ). Furthermore, one of the most fundamental and crucial benefits of online distance education for adults is the opportunity for life-long learning.

In addition to the advantages of distance learning mentioned above, it is known that especially adult learners face particular challenges during their online education. Computer and Internet self-efficacy of adult learners play a significant role in online learning processes (Johnson, Morwane, Dada, Pretorius & Lotriet, 2018 ). The learners who have low perception of competency in these issues or the older adult learners might have challenges in this process and this might cause learner dropout (Appana, 2008 ). The problems related to learner support might also be experienced in online distance education. It might be the case that adult learners do not have available support through the related resources and orientation programs as college students do. Therefore, they might feel isolated in their educational experience. The challenges they experienced in education might increase when they lack of adequate support from their families and workplaces. In addition, adults have multiple roles such as spouse, parent, colleague, and student, each of which means additional responsibilities and workload (Thompson & Porto, 2014 ). These challenges might affect their learning success as well as causing dropout in online distance education programs or courses (Park & Choi, 2009 ). Increasing dropout rates are considered as a crucial problem in distance adult education. One study by Choi and Kim ( 2018 ) examined meaningful factors affecting adult distance learners’ decisions to drop out. Their study found that some of the factors affected adult learners’ decisions to persist in or drop out of the online degree programs such as basic physical constraints from work, scholastic aptitude, family/personal issues, motivation for studying, academic integration, interaction, and motivation (Choi & Kim, 2018 ). In another major study, Lee, Choi and Kim ( 2013 ) found that academic locus of control and metacognitive self-regulation skills were the more important factors influencing the dropout of adult learners. Deschacht and Goeman ( 2015 ) emphasized that future studies should be focused on preventing the dropout of adult online learners. These studies showed that the external and internal challenges faced by adults increased the likelihood of adult learners’ dropout. Due to the high rates of dropout, particularly by adult learners as a result of the challenges they faced, student retention is now considered as a success factor in online distance education programs (De Paepe, Zhu & DePryck, 2018 ; Martinez, 2003 ). Thus, there is also an immense need to focus on these challenges in online distance education practices.

Former research has concentrated on what to do to improve quality and adult learners’ performance in online distance education (Johnson et al., 2018 ; Thompson & Porto, 2014 ). In the review of the literature, it is observed that the relevant studies focus on a single component of distance adult education. For this reason, it seems significant to create a framework and explore current landscape regarding the mentioned challenges for the future studies in adult distance education. Recent studies addressed that a holistic understanding of the problems and challenges faced by adults in online distance education plays a key role in building effective online learning experiences (Wang, 2011 ; De Paepe et al., 2018 ). Therefore, the purpose of this study is to investigate the challenges faced by adult learners in online distance education through the review of the related literature so as to create such a framework. Specifically, the current study strives to answer the research question: What are the identified challenges faced by adult learners at a distance in the literature?

The present study used systematic literature review procedures. The research studies in the literature reporting the challenges faced by adults were systematically reviewed and analyzed. The followed procedure was presented in the following sections.

Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

Several criteria were determined for the inclusion of the studies. The main inclusion criterion was that the reviewed studies had to be conducted in the contexts of online distance education programs offering academic degrees. Therefore, the studies about corporate trainings and Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) were excluded from the study because only the studies reporting the findings from the online distance education programs offering academic degrees were aimed to be included. Based on this main criterion, other inclusion and exclusion criteria were identified to review. Considering the developments in online distance education, the studies published since 2000 were included in this study. As another basic inclusion criterion, only the empirical journal articles were included; that is, the book reviews, literature reviews, meta-analysis studies, editorials, and conference proceedings were excluded in the current study. Furthermore, merely the articles published in peer-reviewed journals were included.

In accordance with the aim of this study, the journal articles aiming to investigate the challenges of adult learners in online distance education were included. As another criterion, the participants of the studies needed to be adult learners in that the studies either stated the ages of the participants explicitly or the participants were adult learners at a distance. The participants of the studies were accepted as adults only if they met the adult learner definition by Kahu et al. ( 2013 ). Since the focus of the current study is on reviewing the studies exploring adult learners’ challenges, only the qualitative, mixed methods, or descriptive studies were included. Additionally, it is obvious in the literature that some challenges faced by adult learners cause dropouts in online distance education programs. For this reason, the journal articles aiming to investigate the reasons for dropout behavior of adult learners were also included in the present study.

Data Collection and Analysis

The data collection started with a comprehensive search on the electronic databases and the tables of contents of the key journals publishing distance education and adult learning articles. The e-databases on which the search was conducted are Web of Science, SAGE Journals Online, Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC), Wiley Online Library, ScienceDirect, SpringerLink , and Taylor & Francis Online Journals . The search was conducted by using the keywords: distance education, adult learning/learners, challenges, obstacles, dropout, persistence , and retention .

The tables of the contents of the 36 key journals in distance education, instructional technology, adult and lifelong education were specifically reviewed. The journal articles were reviewed in terms of their aims, methods, contexts, and results. Finally, 36 journal articles included in this study were identified. The list of the journal articles reviewed in the current study are presented in Table 1 . The demographics of the participants in the reviewed articles are also presented in Table 2 .

Articles reviewed in this study

Participants in the articles reviewed in this study

The data analysis was conducted in three phases: organization of the articles, reduction of the findings in the articles through coding, and illustration of the findings via tables and a figure. The articles were firstly organized in an article database created by the researchers and were analyzed by using Constant Comparative Analysis method as suggested by Glaser ( 1965 ). Constant comparative analysis was used to compare and contrast the challenges that are encountered by adult learners at a distance reported in the studies. The challenges reported in the articles were coded and then categorized based on their similarities and differences. The analysis results were reported by comparing and contrasting the concepts and integrating the studies. The themes were created by adapting Willging and Johnson’s ( 2009 ) category of dropout reasons. They were grouped as the internal challenges directly related to the adult learners’ characteristics, the external challenges affected by the study conditions, and institutional challenges stemming from the educational organization responsible for the delivery of the instruction.

Review Procedure

Following the identification of the research studies based on the relevant literature and inclusion criteria, the abstracts and findings sections of these studies were reviewed. The abstracts were firstly reviewed to find out an indicator or clue of a challenge causing problems or dropout for adults. When an indicator or clue was not found in the abstract, the findings section was reviewed. In the findings section, it was aimed to identify whether there were findings regarding the challenges and whether these findings were related with adults. Finally, the identified findings were coded.

For the internal validity of the study, the reviewed studies and the findings were checked by a subject field expert along with the researchers and the required revisions were made, consequently. As for the external validity, the qualitative findings were analyzed according to Willging and Johnson’s ( 2009 ) category of dropout reasons of adults. As for the reliability, the data collection procedure, including the databases and keywords and data analysis, were clearly reported so that the study can be easily replicated. Figure 1 illustrates the phases of the analysis of a reviewed article and how the findings were coded.

Data Collection Procedure and Decision-Making Process

Following the procedure demonstrated in Figure 1 , 36 articles meeting the pre-determined inclusion criteria were identified and included in the current study. Diverse codes and themes were revealed through the detailed review of the abstracts and findings of these articles.

Findings and Discussion

The challenges experienced by adults were organized as themes depending on the properties of the challenges. The identified themes were internal, external, and program-related challenges.

Internal Challenges

The internal challenges include adult learners’ individual challenges related to their own characteristics. The internal challenges experienced by adult learners are classified as Management Challenges, Learning Challenges, and Technical Challenges as demonstrated in Table 3 .

Internal challenges faced by Adult Learners in Distance Education

The first sub-theme found in the literature is management challenges. In the literature there is a consensus on the fact that adult learners are different from traditional students since they have family and work responsibilities. For this reason, they need to manage their family and work while continuing their education. This requisite is reported in many of the studies in the literature as the source of a major challenge for adults; creating balance between work and family or other social responsibilities (Doherty, 2006 ; Selwyn, 2011 ; Yasmin, 2013 ). Particularly, female learners are reported as the ones who are mostly challenged by such family responsibilities as childcare and domestic works as well as their work if they are employed (Selwyn, 2011 ). Correspondingly, adult learners are required to have time management skills or appropriately structure or schedule their studies to create this balance (Calvin & Freeburg, 2010 ; Zhang & Krug, 2012 ). If they have insufficient or lack of time management skills, then this causes another challenge for them to continue their education or to successfully complete distance education program. The review regarding the internal challenges indicated that middle-aged adults (between the ages of 36 and 55) are unable to create a balance between their education and work, family, and social life. Additionally, female learners who were married and had children generally have challenge to establish balance between their family and education and they could not give adequate importance to their education, accordingly (Selwyn, 2011 ).

The second sub-theme is learning challenges. The aforementioned management challenges influence adults’ commitment to their education and less commitment to education poses one of the learning challenges for them as reported by Dumais et al. ( 2013 ). Yasmin ( 2013 ) found out that the adult learners who start to study after a long period of time have a difficulty focusing on studying. In addition to these personal challenges, some factors pertaining to distance education programs also pose learning challenges for adults when an inconsistency between the program and learners occurs. In their study, Willging and Johnson ( 2009 ) reported that lack of interest in a program or learning materials is a source of challenge for adults. Pierrakeas et al. ( 2004 ), on the other hand, indicated that learners’ inability to understand course materials and their lack of prerequisite knowledge or skills for a course might be also challenges for traditional learners. The review showed that middle-aged adults have challenges to concentrate on studying and course materials owing to their busy work life.

The final sub-theme is technical challenges especially experienced by older adults. The studies conducted with older adults reported that technology usage poses a challenge for them. For example, in his study with undergraduate students who are 50 and older, Nor ( 2011 ) reported that communication on the Internet is a challenge for adult learners. In another study with graduate adult learners who are between 50 and 65 by Erickson and Noonan ( 2010 ), it was reported that the lack of technical skills makes the instructional process challenging for learners. The same finding was also reported in the study with the students who are between 41 and 51, by Dzakiria ( 2012 ). He additionally revealed that accessing reliable information via the Internet is another challenge for adults. The review findings demonstrated that the older adults who are 50 and above unlike the young and middle-aged adults have difficulty to participate in the collaborative activities satisfactorily due to the insufficient technical skills and insufficient interaction on the internet (Nor, 2011 ; Dzakiria, 2012 ; Chang & Kang, 2016 ).

External Challenges

The external challenges include the challenges stemming from work and domestic environments or from responsibilities of adult learners as independent from their personal characteristics. The external challenges are categorized into two sub-themes as Job-related and Domestic challenges as shown in Table 4 .

External challenges faced by Adult Learners in Distance Education

Employed adults have challenges concerning their jobs. Even if they have the ability to create the balance between work and education, they could not find the needed time to meet the course or program requirements when they were overloaded with their works as reported by Dumais et al. ( 2013 ). Likewise, Willging and Johnson ( 2009 ) revealed that varying job responsibilities are also a challenge for adult learners. They also reported that when the adults had jobs that did not have a pre-determined work schedule or had financial problems, there were high rates of dropout in the distance education programs. It was observed that this challenge was faced by the employed middle-aged adults who lived in the countries with high population (e.g. USA, China, India, and Canada), and thereby who had busy work schedule. In this regard, they needed support from the organizations where they worked to meet the educational requirements. Lack of organizational support was reported as either the main source of the challenges or as a factor that made it difficult for adults to deal with these challenges in several studies (Joo, 2014 ; Park & Choi, 2009 ; Willging & Johnson, 2009 ). Due to heavy workload, lack of organizational support, schedule conflicts or, sometimes, family responsibilities –especially for female learners–, adults tend to have limited time to allocate for their education (Erickson & Noonan, 2010 ; Kahu et al., 2014 ; Rao & Giuli, 2010 ; Venter, 2003 ; Willging & Johnson, 2009 ; Zembylas, 2008 ).

One of the domestic challenges is concerned with technical problems such as disconnection problems and lack of broadband Internet speed experienced by adults in their study locations (Dzakiria, 2012 ; Kahu et al., 2014 ; Ostlund, 2005 ; Rao & Giuli, 2010 ). For example, in their study with mature age learners, Kahu et al. ( 2014 ) reported that some of the learners had technical problems in participating in the educational activities at their home and they could not study in their workplaces. This challenge is partially a source of another challenge, which is limited physical environment to study (Kahu et al., 2014 ; Selvyn, 2011 ; Zembylas, 2008 ; Zhang & Krug, 2012 ). In his study with undergraduate and graduate adults, Selwyn ( 2011 ) indicated that the lack of suitable physical environment to study is particularly a challenge for females since they have multiple responsibilities aside from their education such as childcare, household works, and their job-related works if they are employed. In this respect, adults need to have family support for their education as well as organizational support. Otherwise, lack of family support becomes another domestic challenge (Willging & Johnson, 2009 ; Zembylas, 2008 ). In his study with graduate students, Zembylas ( 2008 ) reported that family support served to help adult learners to deal with many of the problems they encountered and to create a balance between their family responsibilities and education.

Program-related Challenges

In online distance education, the context of each program might be also a source of challenge itself for learners, which is called in this study as program-related challenges. These sorts of challenges include the ones pertained to the distance education program in which adults participate in educational activities. Within this theme, there were two sub-themes called ‘tutor-related’ and ‘institutional challenges’ as demonstrated in Table 5 .

Program-related challenges faced by Adult Learners in Distance Education

The literature indicates that adults suffer from insufficient interaction with both tutors and other students. Tutors clearly influence learners’ satisfaction and success in both distance education and traditional education settings. Tutors’ ineffective interaction with learners brings about several learning challenges (Dumais et al., 2013 ; Dzakiria, 2012 ; Joo, 2014 ; Ostlund, 2005 ; Venter, 2003 ). Tutors’ interaction problems with learners might arise when the tutors have limited communication with learners (Joo, 2014 ), or fail to provide them with any response (Dumais et al., 2013 ), or with timely response (Dzakiria, 2012 ). The lack of sufficient feedback ( Östlund, 2005 ), the needed tutor assistance (Pierrakeas et al., 2004 ), and the lack of synchronous communication with tutors (Joo, 2014 ) are also among other interaction problems between the tutor and the learners.

Interaction among learners emerges as another interaction challenge. Studies show that interaction among adults or their engagement in the social learning groups is quite low (Furnborough, 2012 ; Östlund, 2005 ; Venter, 2003 ; Zhang & Krug, 2012 ). The reason for the insufficient interaction among the learners varied in different studies. For example, in Furnborough’s ( 2012 ) study, the adults stated that they could not interact with their peers because of their work and family responsibilities. The participants in Zhang and Krug’s ( 2012 ) study, on the other hand, showed that the reason for their lack of interaction was related to their belief that establishing a social relationship was difficult at a distance.

In some studies, feeling of isolation is reported as a challenge faced by adults. The sources of this feeling might include a single or multiple reasons. For example, in the study conducted with graduate adults, Zembylas ( 2008 ) revealed that the lack or insufficiency of communication between the learners and the instructors and among learners tended to act as a source of isolation on part of the learners. In another study with graduate students, Venter ( 2003 ) listed the sources of isolation as “inadequate structure, discipline, and guidance by tutors”, “inadequate interaction with tutors and among learners”, “lack of feeling of belonging to institution or being a student”, and “lack of time due to work and family responsibilities”.

The final tutor-related challenge is found to be unsuitable course requirements. These sorts of challenges include too difficult assignments (Rao & Giuli, 2010 ; Willging & Johnson, 2009 ), lack of clarity in assignments (Dumais et al., 2013 ), and too difficult or demanding courses or programs (Willging & Johnson, 2009 ; Xenos et al., 2002 ). These challenges might stem from either institutional challenges (Dumais et al., 2013 ; Wilging & Johnson, 2009 ) or internal challenges such as the incongruences between the course materials and learners’ preferences, learners’ lack of prerequisite knowledge about courses and programs (Grace & Smith, 2001 ; Pierrakeas et al., 2004 ) or their lack of interest in the course materials (Willging & Johnson, 2009 ).

The institutional challenges, on the other hand, are unsuitable learning materials, too difficult or demanding programs, and the lack or inefficiency of technological and pedagogical support in distance education institutions. Firstly, the learning materials provided by distance education institutions might not fit learners’ expectations depending on the various reasons and this situation might cause learning challenges. According to the related literature, the learning materials provided by distance education institutions are unsuitable since they do not meet learners’ learning preferences (Grace & Smith, 2001 ). It is also often the case that the learners have a lack of interest in the materials (Willging & Johnson, 2004 ) or they are unable to understand them (Pierrakeas et al., 2004 ). Additionally, the materials might have heavy academic language or be unsuited to learners’ worldview and experiences (Joo, 2014 ). As a common finding, the adult learners experiencing these challenges are generally employed females, who continue their education by dealing with housework and childcare and thus having a great deal of responsibility in both family and work life.

The second challenge is presented as unsuitable course requirements under the tutor-related challenges theme above. Program difficulty or difficulty of the courses in general are also reported as a challenge that brings about dropouts in distance education programs (Xenos et al., 2002 ; Willging & Johnson, 2009 ). For this reason, the study conducted by Dumais et al., ( 2013 ) implies that it is crucial to take learners’ generational status into consideration during the development of distance education programs as well as services.

The final challenge is found as the lack of technological and pedagogical support. Studies indicate that adults need both technological (Erickson & Noonan, 2010 ; Wilging & Johnson, 2009 ) and pedagogical support for learning materials (Dumais et al., 2013 ). Since some studies show that some learners, especially older adults have a challenge in using technology (Dzakiria, 2012 ; Nor, 2011 ), it appears that these learners need technological support from their distance education institutions. For example, in their study with graduate adult learners who are between 50 and 65, Erickson and Noonan ( 2010 ) revealed that adults needed a higher level of technological support to be successful in distance education courses. Additionally, Park and Choi ( 2009 ) reported that organizational support was one of the predictive factors of dropout in distance education courses.

The results of the study revealed three main categories, which comprise internal, external, and program-related challenges. These challenges are found to be generally interrelated. Additionally, the review yielded a classification of the challenges faced by adult learners in online distance education (see Figure 2 ). It was also demonstrated that the challenges perceived by adults depend on individual characteristics such as age, gender, knowledge, skills, and the context.

Challenges Faced by Adult Learners in Distance Education

The theme of internal challenges presents those challenges that are caused by the learners’ individual characteristics or by their lack of some required skills to cope with these challenges. They are classified as management, learning, and technical challenges. It arises from the review that the internal challenges are closely related with the external challenges, which stem from their job and domestic conditions. The job-related challenges include work overload, lack of organizational support, schedule conflicts, financial problems, and limited time to study. Domestic challenges, on the other hand, consist of technical problems, limited environment to study, and lack of family support. In addition, program-related challenges are categorized as tutor-related and institutional challenges. Tutor-related challenges comprise low interaction with tutors, low interaction among learners, feeling of isolation, and unsuitable course requirements. Institutional challenges are shown to be constituted by unsuitable learning materials, too difficult or demanding program, and lack of institutional support. These challenges tend to be strongly related with each other and one challenge might become the source of another as independent from their classifications in this study.

The study has several practical implications for distance education administrators, practitioners, and policy makers as well as theoretical implications for the researchers. First of all, each challenge faced by the adults might be individual and contextual. For this reason, the distance education administrators are required to get student feedback in terms of the effectiveness of their distance learning experience in addition to learning about students’ entry characteristics.

The findings related to the internal challenges demonstrate that adult learners’ participation and their persistence in distance education courses and programs can be increased with the provision of some guidance. This guidance can be focused on effective time management and learning strategies as well as how to handle frequently faced technical problems. It can be in the form of orientation programs, student guides, and ongoing guidance and support. It can be argued that administrators have little chances of overcoming the external challenges. However, these challenges can be overcome by providing flexible course and program requirements in addition to developing contextual solutions for each challenge relying on the characteristics of the learners. Student orientation and mentoring can also be useful in overcoming the identified external challenges. Distance education administrators especially can cope with the institutional challenges faced by the adult learners. For the tutor-related challenges, continuing faculty professional development and performance improvement are essential. An accreditation policy can be adopted for faculty before their recruitment in online distance programs. The study findings particularly underline the importance of faculty’s andragogical and pedagogical competencies in addition to their technological literacy. This can be done through such faculty professional development strategies as student feedback, communities of practice, ongoing support, electronic performance support systems, and so on.

The principal theoretical implication of the study is that instructional technologists and practitioners should focus on personal traits of adult online learners and contextual factors instead of one-size-fits-all approach in adult learning design. There is, therefore, a definite need for employing dynamic assessment tools and learning analytics dashboards which can improve learning and optimize online distance learning environments for adults. This might serve to play a key role in both building effective online learning experiences of adult learners and overcoming learning and program-related challenges. In addition, the findings of the study provide insights for the challenges that prevent the adults from engaging in distance education programs. Thus, educational practitioners should make reasonable effort to create flexible learning environments and course content considering the individual differences and challenges of adult learners. It is considered that a detailed examination of these challenges might have a positive influence on adult learners’ dropout decisions.

Limitations and Recommendations for Future Research

The present study has several limitations, which point at a need for future studies. The study was limited to the articles published after 2000. Future research can also draw a more comprehensive picture of the challenges faced by adult learners in distance education programs with the inclusion of more e-databases or educational journals in the search process. Furthermore, the thesis and dissertations on this issue can also be incorporated into the study to provide an understanding of the adult challenges in local or national contexts. Each of the identified challenges implies a call for the intervention studies. Therefore, in further studies, interventions can be designed and implemented to overcome the currently identified challenges.

Appana, S. (2008). A review of benefits and limitations of online learning in the context of the student, the instructor and the tenured faculty. International Journal on E-learning , 7(1), 5–22. Retrieved from https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/22909  

Boateng, J. K. (2015). Adults Pursuing E-Learning in Ghana--Opportunities, Challenges and Expectations. Journal of Education and e-Learning Research , 2(4), 64–71. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1148655.pdf  

Calvin, J. & Freeburg, B. W. (2010). Exploring adult learners’ perceptions of technology competence and retention in web-based courses. Quarterly Review of Distance Education , 11(2), 63–72. Retrieved from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/53206  

Cercone, K. (2008). Characteristics of Adult Learners With Implications for Online Learning Design. AACE Journal , 16(2), 137–159. Retrieved from https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/24286  

Chang, B., & Kang, H. (2016). Challenges facing group work online. Distance Education , 37(1), 73–88. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2016.1154781  

Choi, H. J., & Kim, B. U. (2018). Factors Affecting Adult Student Dropout Rates in the Korean Cyber-University Degree Programs. The Journal of Continuing Higher Education , 66(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/07377363.2017.1400357  

Choi, H. J., & Park, J. H. (2018). Testing a path-analytic model of adult dropout in online degree programs. Computers & Education , 116(1), 130–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.09.005  

Chu, R. & Tsai, C. C. (2009). Self-directed learning readiness, Internet self-efficacy and preferences towards constructivist Internet-based learning environments among higher-aged adults. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning , 25(5), 489–501. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2009.00324  

De Paepe, L., Zhu, C., & DePryck, K. (2018). Drop-out, Retention, Satisfaction and Attainment of Online Learners of Dutch in Adult Education. International Journal on E-Learning , 17(3), 303–323. Retrieved from https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/174173  

Deschacht, N., & Goeman, K. (2015). The effect of blended learning on course persistence and performance of adult learners: A difference-in- differences analysis. Computers & Education , 87, 83−89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.03.020  

Doherty, W. (2006). An analysis of multiple factors affecting retention in Web-based community college courses. The Internet and Higher Education , 9(4), 245–255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2006.08.004  

Dumais, S. A., Rizzuto, T. E., Cleary, J. & Dowden, L. (2013). Stressors and supports for adult online learners: comparing first-and continuing-generation college students. American Journal of Distance Education , 27(2), 100–110. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2013.783265  

Dzakiria, H. (2012). Illuminating the Importance of Learning Interaction to Open Distance Learning (ODL) Success: A Qualitative Perspectives of Adult Learners in Perlis, Malaysia. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning . Retrieved from http://www.eurodl.org/materials/contrib/2012/Dzakiria.pdf  

Erickson, A. S. G. & Noonan, P. M. (2010). Late-career adults in online education: A rewarding experience for individuals aged 50 to 65. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching , 6(2), 388–397. Retrieved from http://jolt.merlot.org/vol6no2/erickson_0610.pdf  

Furnborough, C. (2012). Making the most of others: autonomous interdependence in adult beginner distance language learners. Distance Education , 33(1), 99–116. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2012.667962  

Glaser, B.G. (1965) The Constant Comparative Method of Qualitative Analysis. Social Problems , 12(4), 436–445. https://doi.org/10.2307/798843  

Grace, L. J. & Smith, P. J. (2001). Flexible delivery in the Australian vocational education and training sector: Barriers to success identified in case studies of four adult learners. Distance education , 22(2), 196–211. https://doi.org/10.1080/0158791010220202  

Gravani, M. N. (2015). Adult learning in a distance education context: Theoretical and methodological challenges. International Journal of Lifelong Education , 34(2), 172–193. https://doi.org/10.1080/02601370.2014.982728  

Iloh, C. (2018). Does distance education go the distance for adult learners? Evidence from a qualitative study at an American community college. Journal of Adult and Continuing Education , 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477971418785384  

Johnson, E., Morwane, R., Dada, S., Pretorius, G., & Lotriet, M. (2018). Adult Learners’ Perspectives on Their Engagement in a Hybrid Learning Postgraduate Programme. The journal of continuing higher education , 66(2), 88–105. https://doi.org/10.1080/07377363.2018.1469071  

Joo, K. P. (2014). A cultural-historical activity theory investigation of contradictions in open and distance higher education among alienated adult learners in Korea National Open University. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning , 15(1). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v15i1.1605  

Kahu, E. R., Stephens, C., Leach, L. & Zepke, N. (2013). The engagement of mature distance students. Higher Education Research & Development , 32(5), 791–804. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2013.777036  

Kahu, E. R., Stephens, C., Zepke, N. & Leach, L. (2014). Space and time to engage: mature-aged distance students learn to fit study into their lives. International Journal of Lifelong Education , 33(4), 523–540. https://doi.org/10.1080/02601370.2014.884177  

Ke, F. (2010). Examining online teaching, cognitive, and social presence for adult students. Computers & Education , 55(2), 808–820. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.03.013  

Ke, F. & Xie, K. (2009). Toward deep learning for adult students in online courses. The Internet and Higher Education , 12(3), 136–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.08.001  

Kim, K. J., Liu, S., & Bonk, C. J. (2005). Online MBA students’ perceptions of online learning: Benefits, challenges, and suggestions. The Internet and Higher Education , 8(4), 335–344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2005.09.005  

Kim, S. W., & Park, S. S. (2015). Analysis of Factors Causing Adult Female Learners to Drop Out of E-Learning Courses in Korea. International Journal on E-Learning , 14(2), 223–233. Retrieved from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/41505  

Knestrick, J. M., Wilkinson, M. R., Pellathy, T. P., Lange-Kessler, J., Katz, R., & Compton, P. (2016). Predictors of retention of students in an online nurse practitioner program. The Journal for Nurse Practitioners , 12(9), 635–640. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nurpra.2016.06.011  

Knowles, M. (1996). Adult Learning. In Robert L. Craig (Ed.), The ASTD Training and Development Handbook (pp. 253–264). NY: McGraw-Hill.  

Lee, Y.; Choi, J. & Kim, T. (2013). Discriminating factors between completers of and dropouts from online learning courses. British Journal of Educational Technology , 44(2), 328–337. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2012.01306.x  

Lim, C. K. (2001). Computer self-efficacy, academic self-concept, and other predictors of satisfaction and future participation of adult distance learners. American Journal of Distance Education , 15(2), 41–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923640109527083  

Lindeman, E. (2015). The meaning of adult education . Andesite Press.  

Martinez, M. (2003). High attrition rates in e-learning: Challenges, predictors and solutions. The E-Learning Developers’ Journal . Retrieved from https://www.elearningguild.com/pdf/2/071403MGT-L.pdf  

McGee, P., Windes, D., & Torres, M. (2017). Experienced online instructors: beliefs and preferred supports regarding online teaching. Journal of Computing in Higher Education , 29(2), 331–352. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-017-9140-6  

McGivney, V. (2004). Understanding persistence in adult learning. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning , 19(1), 33–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/0268051042000177836  

Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M., & Jones, K. (2009). Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning: A meta-analysis and review of online learning studies . Washington, DC: US Department of Education. Retrieved from http://repository.alt.ac.uk/629/1/US_DepEdu_Final_report_2009.pdf  

Moore, M. G., & Kearsley, G. (2011). Distance education: A systems view of online learning . Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.  

Musita, R., Ogange, B. O., & Lugendo, D. (2018). A second chance to dream: initiating ODeL in secondary school re-entry programs for young adult secondary school dropouts the case of Mumias District, Western Kenya. Distance Education , 39(1), 122–133. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2018.1429896  

Nor, N. M. M. (2011). Understanding older adult learners in distance education: The case of Universiti Sains Malaysia. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education , 12(3), 229–340. Retrieved from http://dergipark.gov.tr/tojde/issue/16905/176282  

Östlund, B. (2005). Stress, disruption and community-Adult learners’ experiences of obstacles and opportunities in distance education. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-learning , 8(1 ). Retrieved from http://www.eurodl.org/materials/contrib/2005/Ostlund.pdf  

Park, J. H., & Choi, H. J. (2009). Factors Influencing Adult Learners’ Decision to Drop Out or Persist in Online Learning. Educational Technology & Society , 12(4), 207–217. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/jeductechsoci.12.4.207  

Picciano, A. G. (2002). Beyond student perceptions: Issues of interaction, presence, and performance in an online course. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks , 6(1), 21–40. Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.98.6506  

Pierrakeas, C., Xeno, M., Panagiotakopoulos, C., & Vergidis, D. (2004). A comparative study of dropout rates and causes for two different distance education courses. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning , 5(2), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v5i2.183  

Rao, K. & Giuli, C. (2010). Reaching remote learners: Successes and challenges for students in an online graduate degree program in the Pacific Islands. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning , 11(1), 141–160. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v11i1.785  

Remedios, R. & Richardson, J. T. (2013). Achievement goals and approaches to studying: evidence from adult learners in distance education. Distance Education , 34(3), 271–289. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2013.835776  

Richardson, J. T. E., & King, E. (1998). Adult students in higher education: Burden or boon? The Journal of Higher Education , 69(1), 65–88. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.1998.11775125  

Selwyn, N. (2011). ‘Finding an appropriate fit for me’: examining the (in) flexibilities of international distance learning. International Journal of Lifelong Education , 30(3), 367–383. https://doi.org/10.1080/02601370.2011.570873  

Tekinarslan, E. (2004). Project-based distributed learning and adult learners. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education , 5(2), 74–80. Retrieved from http://tojde.anadolu.edu.tr/makale_goster.php?id=136  

Thistoll, T., & Yates, A. (2016). Improving course completions in distance education: an institutional case study. Distance Education , 37(2), 180–195. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2016.1184398  

Thompson, J., & Porto, S. (2014). Supporting wellness in adult online education. Open Praxis , 6(1), 17–28. https://doi.org/10.5944/openpraxis.6.1.100  

Vanslambrouck, S., Zhu, C., Tondeur, J., Philipsen, B., & Lombaerts, K. (2016). Adult learners’ motivation to participate and perception of online and blended environments. In 15th European Conference on E-Learning (ECEL ) (pp. 750–757). Academic Conferences and Publishing International. Retrieved from https://biblio.ugent.be/publication/8518172/file/8518175  

Venter, K. (2003). Coping with isolation: The role of culture in adult distance learners’ use of surrogates. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning , 18(3), 271–287. https://doi.org/10.1080/0268051032000131035  

Vergidis, D., & Panagiotakopoulos, C. (2002). Student Dropout at the Hellenic Open University: Evaluation of the Graduate Program: Studies in Education. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning , 3(2), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v3i2.101  

Wang, V. C. (2011). Online Adult Education: Policy, Access, Completion and Equity. In Encyclopedia of Information Communication Technologies and Adult Education Integration (pp. 506–520). IGI Global.  

Willging, P. A. & Johnson, S. D. (2009). Factors that influence students’ decision to dropout of online courses. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks , 13(3), 115–127. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ862360.pdf  

Xenos, M., Pierrakeas, C. & Pintelas, P. (2002). A survey on student dropout rates and dropout causes concerning the students in the Course of Informatics of the Hellenic Open University. Computers & Education , 39(4), 361–377. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0360-1315(02)00072-6  

Yasmin, D. (2013). Application of the classification tree model in predicting learner dropout behaviour in open and distance learning. Distance Education , 34(2), 218–231. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2013.793642  

Zembylas, M. (2008). Adult learners’ emotions in online learning. Distance Education , 29(1), 71–87. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587910802004852  

Zhang, Z. & Krug, D. (2012). Virtual Educational Spaces: Adult Learners’ Cultural Conditions and Practices in an Online Learning Environment. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning , 9(7), 3–12. Retrieved from http://www.itdl.org/Journal/Jul_12/Jul_12.pdf  

• Research article
• Open access
• Published: 20 May 2020

Students’ perceptions on distance education: A multinational study

• Patricia Fidalgo 1 ,
• Joan Thormann 2 ,
• Oleksandr Kulyk 3 &
• José Alberto Lencastre 4  

International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education volume  17 , Article number:  18 ( 2020 ) Cite this article

365k Accesses

139 Citations

12 Altmetric

Metrics details

Many universities offer Distance Education (DE) courses and programs to address the diverse educational needs of students and to stay current with advancing technology. Some Institutions of Higher Education (IHE) that do not offer DE find it difficult to navigate through the steps that are needed to provide such courses and programs. Investigating learners’ perceptions, attitudes and willingness to try DE can provide guidance and recommendations for IHEs that are considering expanding use of DE formats. A survey was distributed to undergraduate students in Portugal, UAE and Ukraine. The results of this pilot study showed that in all three countries, students’ major concerns about such programs were time management, motivation, and English language skills. Although students were somewhat apprehensive many indicated they were interested in taking DE courses. Six recommendations informed by interpretation of students’ responses and the literature, are offered to assist institutions who want to offer DE as part of their educational strategy.

Introduction

The World Wide Web has made information access and distribution of educational content available to a large fraction of the world’s population and helped to move Distance Education (DE) to the digital era. DE has become increasingly common in many universities worldwide (Allen & Seaman, 2017 ). Nonetheless, there are still many universities that do not provide this opportunity because it is not part of their institutional culture. As DE becomes more prevalent, countries and Institutions of Higher Education (IHE) that do not provide DE courses will need to look at this option to retain and expand their student population. (Keegan, 1994 ; Nakamura, 2017 ).

In order to develop such programs, it is useful to determine if students are receptive to taking such online courses and are prepared to do so. This study addresses students’ perceptions and their interest in DE. In addition, it provides a comparative analysis across three countries whose IHEs do not have extensive offerings in DE. The results of this research provide some strategies to encourage and support students to take DE courses.

Literature review

A seminal article by Keegan ( 1980 ) presents key aspects of DE. Some of the elements are: physical separation of teacher and learner, learning occurs in the context of an educational institution, technical media are used, teacher and learner communicate, face to face meetings are possible, and an industrial model of providing education is used. More recently varying definitions of DE seem to be based on the perspective of various educators and to reflect the educational culture of each country and IHE. However, some common descriptors seem to be accepted by most stakeholders in the field. Distance education is an educational experience where instructors and learners are separated in time and space (Keegan, 2002 ) which means it can happen away from an academic institution and can lead to a degree or credential (Gunawardena, McIsaac, & Jonassen, 2008 ).

Although there are different types of DE, this research focuses on online learning. The following types of online learning will be investigated: synchronous, asynchronous, blended, massive online open courses (MOOC), and open schedule online courses. In synchronous instruction, teachers and learners meet (usually online) for a session at a predetermined time. According to Watts ( 2016 ) live streaming video and/or audio are used for synchronous interaction. Although videoconferencing allows participants to see each other this is not considered a face-to-face interaction because of the physical separation (Keegan, 1980 ).

Asynchronous instruction means that teachers and learners do not have synchronous sessions and that students have access to course content through the Internet at any time they want or need. Communication among the participants occurs mainly through email and online forums and is typically moderated by the instructor (Watts, 2016 ). According to Garrison ( 2000 ) “Asynchronous collaborative learning may well be the defining technology of the postindustrial era of distance education.” (p.12) Yet another type of DE is blended learning (BL). Garrison and Kanuka ( 2004 ) define BL as combining face-to-face classroom time with online learning experiences. Although it is not clear as to how much time is allocated to online in the blended model “the real test of blended learning is the effective integration of the two main components (face-to-face and Internet technology) such that we are not just adding on to the existing dominant approach or method.” (p.97) In the BL format different teaching strategies and instructional technology can be used to help individuals who have different learning styles, needs and interests (Tseng & Walsh Jr., 2016 ).

Another type of DE is MOOCs (Massive Online Open Courses). This format was first introduced in 2006 and offers distributed open online courses that are available without cost to a very large number of participants (Cormier, McAuley, Siemens, & Stewart, 2010 ). MOOCs origins can be traced to the Open Access Initiative in 2002 which advocates sharing knowledge freely through the Internet. By providing educational opportunities MOOCs can address the increasing demand for training and education (Zawacki-Richter & Naidu, 2016 ). Finally, in open schedule online courses students work asynchronously with all the materials being provided digitally. Although there are deadlines for submitting assignments, students working at their own pace have some independence as to when they do their coursework (Campus Explorer, 2019 ).

There are advantages and disadvantages in taking DE courses. Some of the advantages are self-paced study, time and space flexibility, time saving (no commute between home and school) and the fact that a distance learning course often costs less. Disadvantages include a sense of isolation, the struggle with staying motivated, lack of face-to-face interaction, difficulty in getting immediate feedback, the need for constant and reliable access to technology, and occasionally some difficulty with accreditation (De Paepe, Zhu, & Depryck, 2018 ; Lei & Gupta, 2010 ; Venter, 2003 ; Zuhairi, Wahyono, & Suratinah, 2006 ).

Most of the literature concerning student perception of DE courses, both blended and entirely online, involves students who have enrolled in online courses. Some articles address comparisons of perceptions between face-to-face and online students regarding DE (Daniels & Feather, 2002 ; Dobbs, del Carmen, & Waid-Lindberg, 2017 ; Hannay & Newvine, 2006 ; Lanier, 2006 ). Additional studies address adult and undergraduate students and cover many aspects of the online experience (Dobbs et al., 2017 ; Horspool & Lange, 2012 ; Seok, DaCosta, Kinsell, & Tung, 2010b , a ). However, little, if any research has been conducted that only addresses perceptions of students who live in countries in which few IHEs offer online courses.

In a study comparing online and face-to-face learning, Horspool and Lange ( 2012 ) found that students chose to take online courses to avoid travel time to class and scheduling problems. A majority of both face-to-face and online students did not experience technological issues. Both groups also found that communication with the instructor was adequate. Online students indicated that instructor response time to questions was prompt. By contrast online students perceived peer communication as occurring much less often. Course satisfaction was comparable for both formats (Horspool & Lange, 2012 ). Responses to another survey concerning online and traditional course formats found that students’ reasons for taking online courses included flexibility to accommodate work and family schedules, the ability to avoid commuting to the university and more online courses being available to them (Dobbs et al., 2017 ). Both online and traditional students agreed that traditional courses were easier, and they learned more in that format. They also concurred that online courses required more effort. Experienced online students indicated that the quality of their courses was good while traditional students who had never taken an online course felt that the quality of online courses was lower.

There is additional research that focuses on students including those enrolled in community colleges, MOOCs, blended learning as well as adult learners. Community college students’ and instructors’ perceptions of effectiveness of online courses were compared by Seok et al. ( 2010b , a ). The researchers focused on pedagogical characteristics (management, Universal Design for Learning, interaction, teaching design and content) and technical features (interface, navigation and support). In addition, responses were examined based on various aspects of the subjects’ demographics. Two surveys with 99 items were distributed electronically. One survey was for instructors and the other for students. In general, instructors and students indicated that teaching and learning online was effective. Female students responded more positively to most questions concerning effectiveness, and instructors also found it more positive (Seok et al., 2010b , a ).

Students who enrolled in a MOOC were motivated to take other courses in this format based on their perception that it was useful for achieving their goals. In addition, their motivation was high if the course was posted on a platform that was easy to use (Aharony & Bar-Ilan, 2016 ). This study also found that as students proceeded through the course, they gained confidence.

Blended learning was examined by Kurt and Yildirim ( 2018 ) to determine student satisfaction and what they considered to be important features of the blended format. The results indicated that the Turkish students who participated, almost unanimously felt that BL was beneficial and that their own role and the instructors’ role was central to their satisfaction. The authors stated, “the prominent components in the process have been identified as face-to-face lessons, the features of online course materials, LMS used, design-specific activities, process-based measurement and evaluation, student-student interaction and out-of-class sharing respectively.” (p. 439) DE has a growth potential and offers the opportunity to reach many people (Fidalgo, 2012 ), hence it can be used as a technique for mass education (Perraton, 2008 ). According to Perraton ( 2008 ) DE can be adapted to the needs of current and previous generations who did not complete their education. DE can also reach individuals who live in remote locations and do not have the means to attend school.

Methodology

Study goals.

The goal of this pilot study is to examine what undergraduate students’ perceptions are concerning DE and their willingness to enroll in this type of course. This study focuses on three countries that do not offer extensive DE accredited programs. By comparing three countries with similar DE profiles, commonalties and differences that are relevant and useful can be found. When the IHEs from these countries decide or have the conditions to move towards DE, the results of this study may help them adapt this format to their particular context and students’ needs. Results may also help IHEs plan their strategy for offering online courses to current and future students and attract prospective students who otherwise would not be able to enroll in the face-to-face courses that are available.

Research questions

Have undergraduate students taken an online course previously?

What are undergraduate students’ perceptions of distance education?

What are the reasons for undergraduate students to enroll/not enroll is distance education courses?

What preparation do undergraduate students feel they need to have before taking distance education courses?

What is the undergraduate students’ receptivity towards enrolling in distance education courses?

What types of distance education would undergraduate students be interested in taking?

This research was conducted at IHEs in three countries (Portugal, Ukraine and UAE). A description of each country’s sociodemographic and technological use provides a context for this study.

Portugal, a country located at the western end of the European continent, has a resident population of just over 10 million people (Instituto Nacional de Estatistica, 2019 ). Data collected by Instituto Nacional de Estatistica in 2019 indicated that almost 81% of households in Portugal had Internet access at home. According to the Portuguese National Statistical Institute ( 2019 ), the rate of Internet use by the adult population is about 76%. Among this population, people who attend or have completed secondary and higher education have a higher percentage of Internet use (98%) (Instituto Nacional de Estatistica, 2019 ).

The most used devices to access the Internet are smartphones and laptops. Regarding computer tasks, the most frequent ones are copying and moving files and folders and transferring files from the computer to other devices (PORDATA - Base de Dados Portugal Contemporâneo, 2017 ).

Among Internet users, 80% use social networks, which is a higher percentage than the European Union (EU) average. Mobile Internet access (outside the home and workplace and on portable devices) is 84% and maintains a strong growth trend (Instituto Nacional de Estatistica, 2019 ).

Ukraine is one of the post-soviet countries located in Eastern Europe and it strives to be integrated in economic and political structures of the EU. The current population of the country is 42 million. Despite the low incomes of many Ukrainians, modern technological devices are widespread among the population. The State Statistics Service of Ukraine ( 2019 ) reported that there were 26 million Internet subscribers in the country in the beginning of 2019. However, Ukrainians do not have a high level of digital literacy yet. According to the Digital Transformation Ministry of Ukraine (Communications Department of the Secretariat of the CMU, 2019 ), almost 38% of Ukrainian people aged from 18 to 70 have poor skills in computer literacy and 15.1% of the citizens have no computer skills.

According to the survey conducted by the Digital Transformation Ministry of Ukraine (The Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine, 2019 ) 27.5% Ukrainian families have a tablet, and 30.6% have one smart phone, 26.4% have two smart phones, 16.5% have three smart phones and 10.8% have four and more smart phones. As for laptops, 42.7% Ukrainian families have a laptop and 45.6% have a desktop computer (The Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine, 2019 ). The data from the ministry did not indicate if families have multiple devices, however the data shows that technological devices are widespread.

The United Arab Emirates (UAE) is a country located in the Persian Gulf that borders with Oman and Saudi Arabia. The UAE has a population of 9.77 million and is one of the richest countries in the world based on gross domestic product (GDP) per capita. The resident population consists of 11,5% Emiratis and the remaining residents are expats from countries such as India, Pakistan, Philippines, Egypt and others (Global Media Insight, 2020 ).

Regarding technology use, 91% of the residents use mobile Internetand over 98% of the households have Internet access (Knoema, 2018 ). Mobile devices such as smartphones are used to access the Internet mainly at home or at work (Federal Competitiveness and Statistics Authority, 2017 ).

In 2017 the most frequent Internet activities were: sending/receiving emails (61%), posting information or instant messaging (55%), getting information about goods or services (45%), reading or downloading online newspapers, magazines or electronic books (41%) and telephoning over the Internet/VOIP (33%). Downloading movies, images, music, watching TV or video, or listening to radio or music is also a frequent activity performed by 27% of the Internet users followed by Internet banking (25%) and purchasing or ordering good and services (22%) (Federal Competitiveness and Statistics Authority, 2017 ).

While these three countries were selected due to the location of the researchers and thus provided convenience samples, the three countries have a similar lack of DE offerings. Online surveys were emailed to students enrolled in a variety of undergraduate face-to-face courses during the fall semester of 2018. The students in Portugal and the UAE were enrolled in a teacher education program and the survey was emailed to two course sections in Portugal (73 students) and four course sections in the UAE (108 students). At the IHE in Ukraine, students were majoring in applied mathematics, philology, diagnostics, social work and philosophy, and surveys were emailed to 102 students who were enrolled in five course sections. In Portugal and Ukraine, the URL for the online survey was emailed by the instructor of all the course sections. In the UAE the instructor who emailed the URL for the survey taught two of the course sections. The students in the other two sections knew this instructor from taking courses with her previously. The students participating in this study were a convenience sample based on the disciplines taught by the researchers.

Data collection

An online survey with 10 closed questions about undergraduate students’ perception and receptivity towards enrolling in DE courses was developed by the researchers. Ary, Jacobs, Sorensen, and Walker ( 2010 ) compared traditional methods (i.e. face-to-face, paper and pencil) with web-based surveys and found the latter to be are more effective for gathering data from many participants. The questions designed by the researchers were informed by their experience/practice as well as in-depth literature review. The survey was created to respond to the research questions that guided this study. Response choices to the multiple-choice questions were based on issues and concerns related to DE. Students’ responses were collected towards the end of the first semester of the 2018/19 academic year.

The survey was developed to address research questions that assess undergraduate students’ perceptions of DE and students’ receptivity towards enrolling in DE courses (c.f. Appendix ). The use of surveys allows researchers to “obtain information about thoughts, feelings, attitudes, beliefs, values, perceptions, personality and behavioral intentions of research participants.” (Johnson & Christensen, 2014 , p. 192) The survey questions included multiple response formats: Likert scale, select more than one response and multiple choice. Surveys for Portugal were presented in Portuguese. In Ukraine the surveys were translated into Ukrainian. Since English is the language of instruction at the UAE institution, their survey was in English. The URL for the survey was emailed to students by their instructors and was available in an online Google Form. The survey took approximately 10 min to complete. The study consisted of a “self-selected” convenience sample.

Data analysis

Survey results were recorded in Google Forms and an Excel spreadsheet was used to collect students’ responses. Descriptive statistics of the responses to the survey are presented in graphs and tables with percentages of responses displayed. The descriptive statistics provide summaries about the sample’s answers to each of the questions as well as measures of variability (or spread) and central tendency.

Research approval and data management

The research proposal was submitted to the Research and Grants Committee and approved by the Institutional Review Board of the college in the UAE. No personal information (name, College ID number or any other type of information that allows the identification of students) was asked from the students in the surveys. The surveys were anonymous. Only the Principal Investigator (PI) had access to all the data collected. The data will be stored in the PI’s password protected computer for 5 years.

Fifty five of the 73 Portuguese students who received the survey responded and 98 of the 108 UAE students responded. In the Ukraine 102 students were sent surveys and 70 responded. Below are participants’ responses to questions concerning age, gender, as well as level of confidence using the computer and the Internet.

Students’ age range was from 17 to 50 years old. Most students’ age ranges were between 17 and 29 years. Survey responses indicated that 7% of the students in the UAE were male and 93% female, in the Ukraine 43% were male and 57% female and in Portugal 9% male, and 91% female.

Participants were asked about their level of confidence using a computer and the Internet. Results are presented in Table  1 .

The use of participants from three countries allows the study of trends and to determine differences and/or similarities of perceptions about DE. Although the students were enrolled in courses in diverse content areas, they were all undergraduates, almost all under 30 years old, and most were confident using the computer and Internet. These demographic similarities provided a relatively cohesive group for this study while allowing a comparison across countries.

A range of questions were asked about students’ attitudes towards and experience with DE. To determine the participants’ experience with DE two questions were asked.

The data indicates that out of 223 students who responded to the survey, a total of 63 students have taken DE courses. Half of the Ukraine students, about one quarter of the UAE students and only 5% of students in the group from Portugal had taken DE courses (Fig.  1 ). As shown in Fig.  2 , of the students who have had previous experience in DE, most Ukraine students have taken one or two online courses, most UAE students have taken one course and a few Portuguese students have taken one course.

Students that have taken distance education courses

Number of distance education courses taken

More than half of Portuguese students, about two thirds of the Ukraine students and a little over one third of UAE students had a Very favorable or Favorable attitude towards DE. Approximately one third of Portuguese and Ukraine students were Neutral/Unable to judge their attitude. A little less than half of UAE students also indicated this. A small percentage of Portuguese, and one fifth of UAE students indicated their attitude was Very unfavorable or Unfavorable and no Ukraine students reported this (Table 2 ).

More than one third of Portuguese students shared that managing class and study time, saving time by choosing study location and working at their own pace were reasons to enroll in DE. About two thirds of the students from Ukraine reported that working at their own pace and managing their study time were reasons to enroll. A little more than half of these students reported that reasons for enrolling in DE included managing class time, saving time by selecting study location and not having to travel to school as well as having more options for courses or colleges to attend. Almost half of the UAE students had similar reasons for enrolling in a DE courses including managing class and study time, saving time by choosing study location and working at their own pace. In addition, a little more than half of the UAE students also shared that having more options for courses or colleges to attend were reasons to enroll. The reasons that were selected the least by all three groups were that courses were less expensive and enrolling in a preferred program (Tables  3 and 4 ).

Students were given eleven options as to why they would not enroll in DE courses, which are displayed in Tables  5 and 6 . Two reasons that were chosen most often were difficulty staying motivated and preferring face-to-face classes. A small number of Ukraine students reported this as a reason to not enroll in DE courses. Difficulty getting immediate feedback was also a concern for UAE students. Close to one third in the three groups indicated that difficulty contacting the instructor and interacting with peers as well as missing campus life are reasons for not enrolling. About one tenth of Portuguese, one fifth of Ukraine and one fifth of the UAE students reported difficulty getting accreditation as a reason for not enrolling. Not knowing enough about DE was indicated by one tenth of Portuguese, one fifth of Ukraine and one fifth of the UAE students. Only a small number of all the students indicated three categories that are frequently cited in the literature as preventing students from enrolling, these include access to technology, feeling of isolation and too great an expense.

Tables  7 and 8 show student responses to a question regarding the preparation they think they would need before enrolling in a DE course. A little over one tenth of the Portuguese students indicated that they needed better computer equipment, writing skills and a dedicated study space. About one quarter of these students reported they need better skills in the following areas: time management, computer and English language skills, as well as needing to have learning goals and objectives. Having a better Internet connection and the need to develop a study plan was shared by approximately one third of these students. Finally, the highest rated prerequisite for these Portuguese students was to be more motivated.

Few of the Ukraine students felt that they needed better computer equipment or skills, a dedicated study space or a better Internet connection at home. Their concerns focused on their behaviors as students since half or a little more than half felt they needed to be more motivated, have learning objectives and goals, a study plan and better management skills. About one third of these students also reported that they needed better English language skills.

The UAE students were less confident than the Ukraine students about computer skills and needing better equipment and a better Internet connection at home. Almost half of these UAE students reported their need for a study plan and motivation as their most pressing needs. Better management and English language skills were recorded by about one third of the students. One quarter of the UAE students felt they needed better writing skills and a dedicated study space.

Table 9 shows students’ interest in enrolling in DE courses. Almost one quarter of the Ukraine students are Extremely interested in taking DE courses and almost half are Somewhat interested. This contrasts with the students from Portugal who indicated that only 5% are Extremely interested and almost a quarter Somewhat interested. The UAE students’ interest in enrolling fell in between the students from the two other countries. One fifth to almost one third of all three groups were Neutral/Unable to judge. About one tenth of students from Ukraine reported Not being very interested or Not at all interested which contrasts with the Portuguese and UAE students whose numbers were about one half and one quarter respectively.

Tables  10 and 11 show the types of DE that the students were interested in trying. Portuguese students favored Open schedule courses, followed by Blended learning and Synchronous. Few of these students were interested in MOOCs and Asynchronous. More than half of the students from Ukraine were interested in MOOCs and Blended learning followed by Open schedule. About one third of these students were interested in Synchronous and Asynchronous. UAE students most popular formats were Open schedule and Blended learning followed by Synchronous and Asynchronous. There was little interest in MOOCs by the UAE students. Few Portuguese and Ukraine students indicated that they would not take a DE course, however, almost a quarter of the UAE students indicated this.

Data indicates close to a 100% of the UAE residents use the Internet at home or on their mobile devices (Knoema, 2018 ). By contrast a smaller percentage of individuals use the Internet in Portugal and the Ukraine (Infographics, 2019 ). Internet use in each country does not seem to greatly impact UAE students’ opinions regarding DE.

Students’ perceptions of DE vary across the participants from the three countries. Portuguese and Ukrainian students rated DE more favorably than UAE students. Half of the Ukrainian students have experience with DE which might account for their favorable attitude. In contrast, in Portugal only a very small percentage of the students had experience. However, this does not seem to have negatively influenced their attitude towards DE. The interest level and engagement with new technologies by Portuguese students may help explain the favorable perception the participants had toward DE. A study by Costa, Faria, and Neto ( 2018 ) found that 90% of Portuguese students use new technologies and 69% of them use new technologies more than an hour and a half a day. Based on three European studies, Diário de Noticias ( 2011 ) stated that Portuguese students “appear at the forefront of those who best master information and communication technologies (ICT).” (para.1) Another factor influencing respondents might be that currently, and for the first time, the Portuguese government has passed a law that will regulate DE in the country. This new law will open the possibility for other IHEs to provide DE courses that lead to a degree.

Ukrainian students reported a high level of confidence in operating technological devices. The reason for this may be, in part, because of state educational requirements. Since the end of the 1990s, all Ukrainian students in secondary schools have at least one computer course as a mandatory element of their curriculum. This course covers a wide range of issues, which vary from information society theory to applied aspects of computer usage. Among the seven learning goals of this course three address digital literacy (Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine, 2017 ). Ukrainian students who responded to the survey have taken computer courses for at least 5 years.

In the UAE, most DE courses and programs are not accredited by the Ministry of Education (United Arab Emirates Ministry of Education, 2016 ), which may account for UAE students lack of experience and their inability to judge this type of instruction.

It is worth analyzing the reasons why students enrolled or would enroll in DE courses. The reasons for taking DE courses, such as time management issues, are supported by studies concerning self-regulation and higher retention rates (Bradley, Browne, & Kelley, 2017 ; Peck, Stefaniak, & Shah, 2018 ). Students’ interest in having more control of their study time is also mentioned as one of the primary benefits of DE (Alahmari, 2017 ; Lei & Gupta, 2010 ). Regarding the reasons for not enrolling in DE courses, participants from the three countries mentioned difficulty contacting instructors and peers. Also, more than half of the students in Portugal and the UAE indicated they preferred face-to-face classes. Most students have spent their entire academic lives in traditional classes where interaction and immediate feedback from instructors and peers are more common. These concerns may be why students perceive they would lose a familiar type of interaction and have to engage with classroom participants in a new and different way (Carver & Kosloski Jr., 2015 ; Morris & Clark, 2018 ; Robinson & Hullinger, 2008 ; Summers, Waigandt, & Whittaker, 2005 ). It should be noted that the Portuguese and UAE students were enrolled in teacher education programs and are training to be face-to-face teachers. They may not understand the potential of DE format and are not preparing or expecting to use DE in their professional careers.

Difficulty being motivated was another reason chosen by the participants of the three countries to not enroll in DE courses. The lack of experience in this type of educational format may help explain student lack of confidence with their ability to study and stay on task. This response contrasts with the reasons reported for enrolling in DE courses such as controlling their study time. On one hand, participants like the prospect of having the ability to manage their own time. On the other hand, they are concerned they may lack the discipline they need to be successful.

Although the literature indicates that access to technology, isolation and expense are reasons frequently cited as preventing students from enrolling in DE courses (Lei & Gupta, 2010 ; Venter, 2003 ; Zuhairi et al., 2006 ), these reasons were selected by a very small percentage of the participants of this study. Access and affordability of technology has rapidly increased over the last decade which may help explain this inconsistency. Students may understand that DE courses are now less expensive than traditional university courses (Piletic, 2018 ) and they do not cite this as a reason for not enrolling. Relatively few students indicated they would feel isolated. Since this generation is in constant communication using technology (Diário de Notícias, 2011 ) they may not associate DE learning with isolation. However, it is interesting to note that there was a greater concern for interacting with instructors and peers than isolation.

The Ukrainian students are the most receptive to enrolling in DE courses. This is consistent with their positive perception of this type of learning. In addition, the previous experience of half of the participants may influence their interest as well as encourage their peers’ receptivity. UAE students do not have much experience and fewer than half are open to enrolling in DE courses. This may be due to their lack of experience and other concerns previously mentioned. Only one third of the Portuguese participants indicated their interest in enrolling in DE courses. This is in contrast with almost two thirds saying they had a favorable or very favorable attitude. The reasons for this inconsistency are not evident.

In terms of preparation needed to take DE courses, technical concerns were less of an issue for the participants of all three countries than skills and behaviors. Most participants’ answers focused on student skills including computer, English language and time management. Behaviors such as developing a study plan, having learning goals and objectives and being more motivated were also mentioned. The perceived need for better English language skills was expressed by about one third of the participants, none of whom have English as their native language. English speaking countries have been dominant in DE making English the most commonly used language in online learning (Sadykova & Dautermann, 2009 ). Regarding time management, half of the Ukrainian students expressed their need for improvement in contrast to approximately one third of the participants from the other countries. The difference among responses may be because the Ukrainian students are more self-reflective, or the others are more disciplined. Although both DE and face-to-face courses have deadlines for tasks and assessments, in the face-to-face courses, students meet in person with their instructors who may support and press them to do their work. Lack of in person contact may account for the participants feeling they need to improve these skills when taking DE courses (De Paepe et al., 2018 ). Students expressed concerns about lacking certain skills and having certain behaviors that would lead them to be reluctant to enroll in DE courses. The need for help and preparation are some of the concerns that participants reported. Perceived needs may account for the students’ apprehensions regarding taking DE courses. To promote this type of instruction, IHEs could address students’ concerns (Mahlangu, 2018 ).

Open schedule and blended learning courses were the two preferred formats stated by the participants. The reason that Open schedule is the most popular may be that it provides more freedom than other types of courses. Blended learning offers the familiar face-to-face instruction and some of the conveniences of DE which may be why participants are interested in this model.

Studies regarding the use of MOOCs in all three countries have been conducted indicating that researchers in these locations are aware that this course format is of potential interest to local students (Eppard & Reddy, 2017 ; Gallacher, 2014 ; Gonçalves, Chumbo, Torres, & Gonçalves, 2016 ; Sharov, Liapunova, & Sharova, 2019 ; Strutynska & Umryk, 2016 ). Ukrainian students selected MOOCs much more than students in the other countries. The reason for this may be that these students are more knowledgeable about MOOCs, because this type of course is usually at no cost and/or offered by prestigious IHEs (Cormier et al., 2010 ). However, this study did not ask why students were interested in MOOCs or other types of DE courses.

Limitations and future research

While this study offers useful information regarding undergraduate students’ perception and receptivity in taking DE courses, it has limited generalizability because of the size of the sample and the type of statistical analysis performed. Participants from two of the countries were enrolled in teacher education programs and were primarily female, thus future studies would benefit from including more students in diverse programs and a more equitable gender distribution.

Since many IHEs also offer programs for graduate students it would be useful to survey these students about their opinion and availability to enroll in DE courses. This would provide additional information for IHEs that are interested in developing DE programs.

There were some inconsistencies in the students’ responses such as Portuguese students’ interest in enrolling in DE courses not matching their favorable/ very favorable attitude towards DE. It would be helpful to conduct future research regarding this and other inconsistencies.

A study is currently being planned to collect data that will provide a larger and more diverse sample and include additional IHEs. This future research will potentially increase the available knowledge on how to provide DE for a greater number of students.

Conclusion and recommendations

Further development of DE courses and programs at IHEs in countries such as Portugal, UAE and Ukraine have good prospects. The students’ primary concerns regarding taking DE courses were similar among the three countries. These concerns included time management, motivation, and English language skills. However, this did not totally diminish participants interest in taking online courses especially for the Ukrainian students.

Based on this research, there are some obstacles that can be addressed to support the expansion of DE in the three countries that were studied and in other countries. The following recommendations may assist IHEs in promoting DE.

Recommendations for preparation within IHEs

IHEs can take proactive steps to prepare DE offerings, however, a one-size fit all model may not be appropriate for all countries and IHEs. Each institution needs to develop their own plan that meets the needs of their students and faculty. Data from this pilot study and the literature (Elbaum, McIntyre, & Smith, 2002 ; Hashim & Tasir, 2014 ; Hux et al., 2018 ) suggest that following steps might be taken:

Assess readiness to take DE courses through a survey and have students speak with counselors.

Provide pre-DE courses to build skills and behaviors based on students’ concerns.

Train instructors to develop and deliver DE courses that help to overcome obstacles such as motivation and time management.

Offer courses in a blended learning format to familiarize students with online learning which may provide a transitional model.

Recommendations for IHE outreach

This study shows that there is some student interest in enrolling in online courses. It is not sufficient for IHEs to make changes internally within their own institution. IHEs need to develop external strategies and actions that help advance the development of DE:

Promote DE in social media to target potential students and encourage them to take courses.

Urge government agencies to accredit DE courses and programs.

This pilot study provides some background information that may help IHEs to offer DE courses. Additional research about students’ preferences and needs regarding DE should be conducted. The sample size, IHEs included and participating countries could be expanded in order to gain a greater understanding.

Different cultural characteristics need to be taken into account in the development of online courses and programs. DE is being increasingly included by IHEs all around the world. To stay current, universities will need to find ways to offer DE to their current and prospective students.

Acknowledgements

Not applicable.

This research was not funded.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Curriculum and Instruction Division, Emirates College for Advanced Education, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates

Patricia Fidalgo

Educational Technology Division, Lesley University, Cambridge, MA, USA

Joan Thormann

Philosophy Department, Oles Honchar Dnipro National University, Dnipropetrovs’ka oblast, Ukraine

Oleksandr Kulyk

Department of Curricular Studies and Educational Technology, University of Minho, Braga, Portugal

José Alberto Lencastre

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Patricia Fidalgo: design of the work, data collection, analysis, interpretation of data, and draft of the work. Joan Thormann: design of the work, analysis, interpretation of data, and draft of the work. Oleksandr Kulyk: data collection, interpretation of data, and draft of the work. José Alberto Lencastre: data collection. The author(s) read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Patricia Fidalgo .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Online Survey Questions

1. If the students have taken any distance education courses previously and if yes, how many;

2. What are the students’ perceptions of distance education;

3. What are the reasons students would enroll in distance education courses;

4. What are the reasons students would not enroll in a distance education course;

5. What preparation do students feel they need before taking distance education courses;

6. What is the level of students’ interest towards enrolling in distance education courses;

7. What types of distance education would students be interested in trying;

8. What is the students’ age;

9. What is the students’ gender;

10. How confident do students feel using a computer and the Internet.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Fidalgo, P., Thormann, J., Kulyk, O. et al. Students’ perceptions on distance education: A multinational study. Int J Educ Technol High Educ 17 , 18 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-020-00194-2

Download citation

Received : 11 December 2019

Accepted : 18 March 2020

Published : 20 May 2020

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-020-00194-2

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Distance education
• Multinational study
• Perceptions of distance education
• Undergraduate students

• DOI: 10.2308/IACE.2005.20.3.255
• Corpus ID: 153514761

Distance Education: A Review of the Contemporary Literature

• S. Bryant , J. B. Kahle , Brad A. Schafer
• Published 1 August 2005
• Education, Business
• Issues in Accounting Education

125 Citations

Literature review of online remedial education, accounting education literature review (2003–2005), digital economy in education: perspectives and development perspectives, competency approach to accounting education : a global view, new communication technologies' influence on distance education (de) environments: changing roles and competencies of de experts, distance education in a cost accounting course: instruction, interaction, and multiple measures of learning outcomes, a review of the role of information communication technology and course design in transitional education practices, curriculum and propensity toward online accounting education., the factor structure of teaching development needs for distance‐delivered e‐learning, preliminary evidence of a relationship between the use of online learning and academic performance in a south african first-year university accounting course.

• Highly Influenced

58 References

Theory and distance education: a new discussion, foundations of distance education, structural issues in distance education, distance education as strategy: how can your school compete, the use of technology in the delivery of instruction: implications for accounting educators and education researchers, interactive distance education in business: is the new technology right for you, theory and practice of distance education, accounting education literature review (20002002), developing the "virtual" classroom: a business school example., comparing distance learning and classroom learning: conceptual considerations., related papers.

Showing 1 through 3 of 0 Related Papers

Home News & Diary School Blog

Online Distance Learning: A Literature Review

29 Sep 2020

Uncategorised

This week’s blogpost is a guest post by Dr John L. Taylor , Director of Learning, Teaching and Innovation at Cranleigh School .

Dr Taylor is leading a free CIRL professional development webinar on project-based learning, on 17 November from 4-5pm GMT. The link will be available on CIRL’s Eventbrite page soon and the webinar recording will be added to CIRL’s Resources and Professional Development page .

What does the secondary research literature tell us about distance learning?

This blogpost offers a literature review on online distance learning, which is thematically divided into four sections. I first consider what the literature tells us about the efficacy of online distance learning (section 1) and the importance of building a learning community (section 2). I then discuss what the literature says in response to two questions: ‘Does online distance learning work better for some students?’ (section 3) and ‘Can online distance learning support the development of self-regulated learning?’ (section 4).

In this review, the following key terms are defined as follows:

• Distance learning: a ‘form of education in which the main elements include physical separation of teachers and students during instruction and the use of various technologies to facilitate student-teacher and student-student communication.’ [1]
• Online learning: ‘education that takes place over the internet’. [2] This can be subdivided into asynchronous online courses that do not take place in real-time and synchronous online courses in which teacher and student interact online simultaneously. [3]
• Blended learning: a hybrid mode of interaction which combines face-to-face in-person meetings with online interaction. [4] As blended learning is a hybrid model, either the face-to-face or the online elements may be dominant. So, for example, blended learning can occur when online instructional tools are used to support face-to-face learning in a classroom, or when some face-to-face instruction is interspersed with online learning as part of a longer course.
• A virtual school: ‘an entity approved by a state or governing body that offers courses through distance delivery – most commonly using the internet’. [5]
• Self-regulated learning: ‘the modulation of affective, cognitive and behavioural processes throughout a learning experience in order to reach a desired level of achievement’. [6] Self-regulating learning skills have been described as abilities such as planning, managing and controlling the learning process. [7] Processes that occur during self-regulated learning include goal setting, metacognition and self-assessment. [8]

1. The Efficacy of Online Distance Learning

That said, there is also evidence of equivalence across a number of outcome measures. A 2004 meta-analysis by Cathy Cavanaugh et al of 116 effect sizes measured across 14 K-12 web-delivered distance learning programmes between 1999 and 2004 found that there was no significant difference in outcomes between virtual and face-to-face schools. [10]

A 2015 study by Heather Kauffmann explored factors predictive of student success and satisfaction with online learning. [11] Kauffmann notes that several studies have found that online learning programmes lead to outcomes that are comparable to those of face-to-face programmes.

VanPortfliet and Anderson note that research into hybrid instruction indicates that students achieve outcomes that match, if not exceed, outcomes from other instructional modalities. In particular, academic achievement by students in hybrid programmes is consistently higher than that of students engaged in purely online programmes. [12]

The ongoing discussion in the literature suggests that it is difficult to draw general conclusions about the efficacy of online learning as such, not least because it constitutes in significant ways a distinctive mode of learning when compared with real-world instruction. It is perhaps better, then, to look more specifically at questions such as the comparative strengths and challenges of moving to virtual schooling, the conditions which need to be in place for it to function well and the manner in which this transition is experienced by learners with different capabilities.

2. The Importance of Building a Learning Community

A helpful summary of research about online learning by Jonathan Beale at CIRL contains an outline of principles concerning successful online distance learning programmes.The summary explores research-based recommendations for effective teaching and learning practices in online and blended environments made by Judith V. Boettcher and Rita-Marie Conrad in their 2016 work, The Online Teaching Survival Guide: Simple and Practical Pedagogical Tips . [13] A central emphasis of these recommendations is that successful online learning depends upon the formation of an online learning community, and this is only possible if there is regular online interaction between teachers and students:

Why is presence so important in the online environment? When faculty actively interact and engage students in a face-to-face classroom, the class evolves as a group and develops intellectual and personal bonds. The same type of community bonding happens in an online setting if the faculty presence is felt consistently. [14]

The significance of relationship building is noted in the Michigan Virtual Learning Research Institute’s Teacher Guide to Online Learning :

Creating a human-to-human bond with your online students, as well as with their parents/guardians and the student’s local online mentor, is critical in determining student success in your online course. This can be accomplished through effective individual and group communication, encouraging engagement in the course, productive and growth-focused feedback, and multiple opportunities for students to ask questions and learn in a way that is meaningful to them. [15]

Research into virtual learning emphasises the importance of the connection between students and their teachers. This can be lost if there is no ‘live’ contact element at all. As Beale notes, this does not necessarily mean that every lesson needs to include a video meeting, though there is a beneficial psychological impact of knowing that the teacher is still in contact and regular face-to-face online discussions can enable this. There are other forms – a discussion thread which begins during a lesson and is open throughout can perform the same role, though in cases where meeting functions are available, students may be directed to use these rather than email.

As well as the teacher-student relationship, student-student links are important. There is evidence of improved learning when students are asked to share their learning experiences with each other. [16]

Beale’s research summary also emphasizes the importance of a supportive and encouraging online environment. Distance learning is challenging for students and the experience can be frustrating and de-motivating if technology fails (e.g., if work gets lost or a live session cannot be joined due to a connection failure or time-zone difference). More than ever, teachers need to work at providing positive encouragement to their students, praising and rewarding success and acknowledging challenges when they exist. It is also valuable if teachers can identify new skills that students are acquiring – not least skills in problem-solving, using information technology and resilience – and encourage their classes when they see evidence of these.

3. Does online distance learning work better for some students?

Given that, more or less by definition, students participating in an online distance learning programme will be operating with a greater degree of autonomy, it may be expected that those who will be best suited to online learning will be those with the greatest propensity for self-regulated learning. This view is advanced in a review of the literature on virtual schools up until 2009, by Michael Barbour and Thomas Reeves:

The benefits associated with virtual schooling are expanding educational access, providing high-quality learning opportunities, improving student outcomes and skills, allowing for educational choice, and achieving administrative efficiency. However, the research to support these conjectures is limited at best. The challenges associated with virtual schooling include the conclusion that the only students typically successful in online learning environments are those who have independent orientations towards learning, highly motivated by intrinsic sources, and have strong time management, literacy, and technology skills. These characteristics are typically associated with adult learners. This stems from the fact that research into and practice of distance education has typically been targeted to adult learners. [17]

Given the lack of evidence noted by Barbour and Reeves, a more cautious conclusion would be that we may expect to find a relationship between outcomes from online distance learning programmes and the propensity of students for self-regulated learning, rather than the conclusion that this capacity is a precondition of success.

Kauffmann notes that students with the capacity for self-regulated learning tend to achieve better outcomes from online courses. This result is not surprising, given that in online learning more responsibility is placed on the learner. [18]

A 2019 review of 35 studies into online learning by Jacqueline Wong et al explores the connection between online learning and self-regulated learning. The study highlights the significance of supports for self-regulated learning such as the use of prompts or feedback in promoting the development and deployment of strategies for self-regulated learning, leading to better achievement in online learning:

In online learning environments where the instructor presence is low, learners have to make the decisions regarding when to study or how to approach the study materials. Therefore, learners’ ability to self-regulate their own learning becomes a crucial factor in their learning success … [S]upporting self-regulated learning strategies can help learners become better at regulating their learning, which in turn could enhance their learning performance. [19]

In a 2005 study of ‘Virtual High School’ (VHS), the oldest provider of distance learning courses to high school students in the United States, Susan Lowes notes that the VHS’s pedagogical approach ‘emphasizes student-centered teaching; collaborative, problem-based learning; small-group work; and authentic performance-based assessment’. [20] This approach, Lowes comments, is aligned with a growing body of literature on the characteristics of successful online courses.

Taking a more student-centred approach during online instruction fits with features of the online environment. It is natural to make more use of asynchronous assignments and to expect students to take more responsibility for their study, given that they are not subject to direct supervision in a classroom setting and may be accessing course materials outside of a conventional timetable.

4. Can online distance learning support the development of self-regulated learning?

It may be the case that, even if Barbour and Reeves are correct in claiming that only those students with an ‘independent orientation towards learning’typically achieve successful outcomes from online distance learning programmes, a countervailing relationship obtains insofar as participation in an online distance learning programme may foster the development of the propensity for self-regulated learning.

A controlled study in 2018 by Ruchan Uz and Adem Uzun of 167 undergraduate students on a programming language course compared blended learning with a traditional learning environment.  The study found that, for the purpose of developing self-regulated learning skills, blended instruction was more effective than traditional instruction. [21]

In a 2011 review of 55 empirical studies, Matthew Bernacki, Anita Aguilar and James Byrnes noted that research suggests that:

[T]echnologically enhanced learning environments … represent an opportunity for students to build their ability to self-regulate, and for some, leverage their ability to apply self-regulated learning … to acquire knowledge. [22]

Their review suggests that the use of technologically enhanced learning environments can promote self-regulated learning and that such environments are best used by learners who can self-regulate their learning. [23]

However, an investigation by Peter Serdyukov and Robyn Hill into whether online students do learn independently argues that independent learning requires active promotion as well as a desire to promote autonomy on the part of the instructor and the necessary skills and motivation on the part of students. Where these conditions are not met, the aspiration to autonomy is frustrated, which can lead to negative outcomes from the online learning experience. [24]

Bernacki, Aguilar and Brynes employed an Opportunity-Propensity (O-P) framework. The O-P framework was introduced by Brynes and Miller in a 2007 paper exploring the relative importance of predictors of math and science achievement, where it was described as follows:

This framework assumes that high achievement is a function of three categories of factors: (a) opportunity factors (e.g., coursework), (b) propensity factors (e.g., prerequisite skills, motivation), and (c) distal factors (e.g., SES). [25]

It is plausible to suggest that the two-way relationship between self-regulated learning skills and successful participation in an online distance learning programme can be explained in terms of the opportunities online distance learning offers in three areas: first, to develop self-regulated learning skills afforded by the online distance learning environment; second, the prior propensity of learners to self-regulate their learning; and third, changes in distal factors (such as exclusive mediation of learning through online platforms to IT and parental involvement in learning).

Summary of Secondary Research Literature

The following points can be made about online distance learning based on the foregoing review:

• Successful online learning depends upon the formation of an online learning community. Regular online interaction between teachers and students is important in the development of an online community. Teacher-student and student-student links are part of this.
• Students with the capacity for self-regulated learning tend to achieve better outcomes from online courses.
• There is some evidence that online distance learning programmes can be used to help develop self-regulated learning skills. This is provided that both teacher and student are motivated by the goal of building autonomy .
• There is support in the research literature for using collaborative, problem-based learning and authentic performance-based assessment within online learning programmes.

Coda: review and revise

It is fair to say that the move to an entirely distance learning programme is the single biggest and most rapid change that many educators will ever have had to make. As with any large-scale rapid and fundamental innovation, it is hard to get everything right. We need to be willing to revise and refine. This may mean adapting to use a new software platform across the whole school if problems are found with existing provision, or it may be an adjustment to expectations about lesson length or frequency of feedback. Keeping distance learning programmes under review is also essential as we look towards a possible future in which it will co-exist with face-to-face teaching.

This literature review is an edited version of the literature review in my report, ‘An Investigation of Online Distance Learning at Cranleigh’ , September 2020, which can be downloaded here . In that report, the literature review is used to establish several conclusions about the implementation of online learning programmes. Those findings are compared to trends discernible in the responses to a questionnaire survey of three year groups at Cranleigh School (years 9, 10 and 12). The programme of study for these year groups was designed to provide continuity of delivery of the curriculum, in contrast to the programmes developed for years 11 and 13, where a customised programme of study was developed to bridge the gap created by the withdrawal of national public examinations during the summer term of 2020.

[1] ‘Distance learning | education | Britannica’ .

[2] Joshua Stern, ‘Introduction to Online Teaching and Learning’ .

[3] Fordham University, ‘Types of Online Learning’ .

[5] Michael K. Barbour and Thomas C. Reeves, ‘The reality of virtual schools: A review of the literature’, Computers & Education 52.2 (2009), pp. 402-416.

[6] Maaike A. van Houten‐Schat et al , ‘Self‐regulated learning in the clinical context: a systematic review’, Medical Education 52.10 (2018), pp. 1008-1015.

[7] René F. Kizilcec, Mar Pérez-Sanagustín & Jorge J. Maldonado, ‘Self-regulated learning strategies predict learner behavior and goal attainment in Massive Open Online Courses’, Computers & education 104 (2017), pp. 18-33.

[8] Sofie M. M. Loyens, Joshua Magda and Remy M. J. P. Rikers, ‘Self-directed learning in problem-based learning and its relationships with self-regulated learning’, Educational Psychology Review 20.4 (2008), pp. 411-427.

[9] Paul VanPortfliet and Michael Anderson, ‘Moving from online to hybrid course delivery: Increasing positive student outcomes’, Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching 6.1 (2013), pp. 80-87.

[10] Cathy Cavanaugh et al , ‘The effects of distance education on K-12 student outcomes: A meta-analysis’, Learning Point Associates/North Central Regional Educational Laboratory (NCREL), 2004.

[11] Heather Kauffman, ‘A review of predictive factors of student success in and satisfaction with online learning’, Research in Learning Technology 23 (2015).

[12] VanPortfliet & Anderson, op. cit., pp 82 – 83 .

[13] Judith V. Boettcher & Rita-Marie Conrad, The Online Teaching Survival Guide: Simple and Practical Pedagogical Tips (Second Edition; San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2016).

[14] Ibid. Boettcher & Conrad’s chapter is reprinted with permission in this article , from which the quotation is taken.

[15] Michigan Virtual’s ‘Teacher Guide to Online Learning’ .

[16] Joan Van Tassel & Joseph Schmitz, ‘Enhancing learning in the virtual classroom’, Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching 6.1 (2013), pp. 37-53.

[17] Michael K. Barbour & Thomas C. Reeves, ‘The reality of virtual schools: A review of the literature’, Computers & Education 52.2 (2009), pp. 402-416.

[18] Heather Kauffman, ‘A review of predictive factors of student success in and satisfaction with online learning’, Research in Learning Technology 23 (2015).

[19] Jacqueline Wong et al , ‘Supporting self-regulated learning in online learning environments and MOOCs: A systematic review’, International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction 35.4-5 (2019), pp. 356-373.

[20] ‘Online Teaching and Classroom Change – CiteSeerX’ .

[21] Ruchan Uz & Adem Uzun, ‘The Influence of Blended Learning Environment on Self-Regulated and Self-Directed Learning Skills of Learners’, European Journal of Educational Research 7.4 (2018), pp. 877-886.

[22] Matthew L. Bernacki, Anita C. Aguilar & James P. Byrnes, ‘Self-regulated learning and technology-enhanced learning environments: An opportunity-propensity analysis’, Fostering self-regulated learning through ICT , IGI Global (2011), pp. 1-26.

[24] Peter Serdyukov & R. Hill, ‘Flying with clipped wings: Are students independent in online college classes’, Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching 6.1 (2013), pp. 52-65.

[25] James P. Byrnes & David C. Miller, ‘The relative importance of predictors of math and science achievement: An opportunity–propensity analysis’, Contemporary Educational Psychology 32.4 (2007), pp. 599-629.

The Teaching and Learning Summit

About the Centre

Our Research

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

The PMC website is updating on October 15, 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Elsevier - PMC COVID-19 Collection

A systematic review of research on online teaching and learning from 2009 to 2018

Associated data.

Systematic reviews were conducted in the nineties and early 2000's on online learning research. However, there is no review examining the broader aspect of research themes in online learning in the last decade. This systematic review addresses this gap by examining 619 research articles on online learning published in twelve journals in the last decade. These studies were examined for publication trends and patterns, research themes, research methods, and research settings and compared with the research themes from the previous decades. While there has been a slight decrease in the number of studies on online learning in 2015 and 2016, it has then continued to increase in 2017 and 2018. The majority of the studies were quantitative in nature and were examined in higher education. Online learning research was categorized into twelve themes and a framework across learner, course and instructor, and organizational levels was developed. Online learner characteristics and online engagement were examined in a high number of studies and were consistent with three of the prior systematic reviews. However, there is still a need for more research on organization level topics such as leadership, policy, and management and access, culture, equity, inclusion, and ethics and also on online instructor characteristics.

• • Twelve online learning research themes were identified in 2009–2018.
• • A framework with learner, course and instructor, and organizational levels was used.
• • Online learner characteristics and engagement were the mostly examined themes.
• • The majority of the studies used quantitative research methods and in higher education.
• • There is a need for more research on organization level topics.

1. Introduction

Online learning has been on the increase in the last two decades. In the United States, though higher education enrollment has declined, online learning enrollment in public institutions has continued to increase ( Allen & Seaman, 2017 ), and so has the research on online learning. There have been review studies conducted on specific areas on online learning such as innovations in online learning strategies ( Davis et al., 2018 ), empirical MOOC literature ( Liyanagunawardena et al., 2013 ; Veletsianos & Shepherdson, 2016 ; Zhu et al., 2018 ), quality in online education ( Esfijani, 2018 ), accessibility in online higher education ( Lee, 2017 ), synchronous online learning ( Martin et al., 2017 ), K-12 preparation for online teaching ( Moore-Adams et al., 2016 ), polychronicity in online learning ( Capdeferro et al., 2014 ), meaningful learning research in elearning and online learning environments ( Tsai, Shen, & Chiang, 2013 ), problem-based learning in elearning and online learning environments ( Tsai & Chiang, 2013 ), asynchronous online discussions ( Thomas, 2013 ), self-regulated learning in online learning environments ( Tsai, Shen, & Fan, 2013 ), game-based learning in online learning environments ( Tsai & Fan, 2013 ), and online course dropout ( Lee & Choi, 2011 ). While there have been review studies conducted on specific online learning topics, very few studies have been conducted on the broader aspect of online learning examining research themes.

2. Systematic Reviews of Distance Education and Online Learning Research

Distance education has evolved from offline to online settings with the access to internet and COVID-19 has made online learning the common delivery method across the world. Tallent-Runnels et al. (2006) reviewed research late 1990's to early 2000's, Berge and Mrozowski (2001) reviewed research 1990 to 1999, and Zawacki-Richter et al. (2009) reviewed research in 2000–2008 on distance education and online learning. Table 1 shows the research themes from previous systematic reviews on online learning research. There are some themes that re-occur in the various reviews, and there are also new themes that emerge. Though there have been reviews conducted in the nineties and early 2000's, there is no review examining the broader aspect of research themes in online learning in the last decade. Hence, the need for this systematic review which informs the research themes in online learning from 2009 to 2018. In the following sections, we review these systematic review studies in detail.

Comparison of online learning research themes from previous studies.

2.1. Distance education research themes, 1990 to 1999 ( Berge & Mrozowski, 2001 )

Berge and Mrozowski (2001) reviewed 890 research articles and dissertation abstracts on distance education from 1990 to 1999. The four distance education journals chosen by the authors to represent distance education included, American Journal of Distance Education, Distance Education, Open Learning, and the Journal of Distance Education. This review overlapped in the dates of the Tallent-Runnels et al. (2006) study. Berge and Mrozowski (2001) categorized the articles according to Sherry's (1996) ten themes of research issues in distance education: redefining roles of instructor and students, technologies used, issues of design, strategies to stimulate learning, learner characteristics and support, issues related to operating and policies and administration, access and equity, and costs and benefits.

In the Berge and Mrozowski (2001) study, more than 100 studies focused on each of the three themes: (1) design issues, (2) learner characteristics, and (3) strategies to increase interactivity and active learning. By design issues, the authors focused on instructional systems design and focused on topics such as content requirement, technical constraints, interactivity, and feedback. The next theme, strategies to increase interactivity and active learning, were closely related to design issues and focused on students’ modes of learning. Learner characteristics focused on accommodating various learning styles through customized instructional theory. Less than 50 studies focused on the three least examined themes: (1) cost-benefit tradeoffs, (2) equity and accessibility, and (3) learner support. Cost-benefit trade-offs focused on the implementation costs of distance education based on school characteristics. Equity and accessibility focused on the equity of access to distance education systems. Learner support included topics such as teacher to teacher support as well as teacher to student support.

2.2. Online learning research themes, 1993 to 2004 ( Tallent-Runnels et al., 2006 )

Tallent-Runnels et al. (2006) reviewed research on online instruction from 1993 to 2004. They reviewed 76 articles focused on online learning by searching five databases, ERIC, PsycINFO, ContentFirst, Education Abstracts, and WilsonSelect. Tallent-Runnels et al. (2006) categorized research into four themes, (1) course environment, (2) learners' outcomes, (3) learners’ characteristics, and (4) institutional and administrative factors. The first theme that the authors describe as course environment ( n  = 41, 53.9%) is an overarching theme that includes classroom culture, structural assistance, success factors, online interaction, and evaluation.

Tallent-Runnels et al. (2006) for their second theme found that studies focused on questions involving the process of teaching and learning and methods to explore cognitive and affective learner outcomes ( n  = 29, 38.2%). The authors stated that they found the research designs flawed and lacked rigor. However, the literature comparing traditional and online classrooms found both delivery systems to be adequate. Another research theme focused on learners’ characteristics ( n  = 12, 15.8%) and the synergy of learners, design of the online course, and system of delivery. Research findings revealed that online learners were mainly non-traditional, Caucasian, had different learning styles, and were highly motivated to learn. The final theme that they reported was institutional and administrative factors (n  = 13, 17.1%) on online learning. Their findings revealed that there was a lack of scholarly research in this area and most institutions did not have formal policies in place for course development as well as faculty and student support in training and evaluation. Their research confirmed that when universities offered online courses, it improved student enrollment numbers.

2.3. Distance education research themes 2000 to 2008 ( Zawacki-Richter et al., 2009 )

Zawacki-Richter et al. (2009) reviewed 695 articles on distance education from 2000 to 2008 using the Delphi method for consensus in identifying areas and classified the literature from five prominent journals. The five journals selected due to their wide scope in research in distance education included Open Learning, Distance Education, American Journal of Distance Education, the Journal of Distance Education, and the International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning. The reviewers examined the main focus of research and identified gaps in distance education research in this review.

Zawacki-Richter et al. (2009) classified the studies into macro, meso and micro levels focusing on 15 areas of research. The five areas of the macro-level addressed: (1) access, equity and ethics to deliver distance education for developing nations and the role of various technologies to narrow the digital divide, (2) teaching and learning drivers, markets, and professional development in the global context, (3) distance delivery systems and institutional partnerships and programs and impact of hybrid modes of delivery, (4) theoretical frameworks and models for instruction, knowledge building, and learner interactions in distance education practice, and (5) the types of preferred research methodologies. The meso-level focused on seven areas that involve: (1) management and organization for sustaining distance education programs, (2) examining financial aspects of developing and implementing online programs, (3) the challenges and benefits of new technologies for teaching and learning, (4) incentives to innovate, (5) professional development and support for faculty, (6) learner support services, and (7) issues involving quality standards and the impact on student enrollment and retention. The micro-level focused on three areas: (1) instructional design and pedagogical approaches, (2) culturally appropriate materials, interaction, communication, and collaboration among a community of learners, and (3) focus on characteristics of adult learners, socio-economic backgrounds, learning preferences, and dispositions.

The top three research themes in this review by Zawacki-Richter et al. (2009) were interaction and communities of learning ( n  = 122, 17.6%), instructional design ( n  = 121, 17.4%) and learner characteristics ( n  = 113, 16.3%). The lowest number of studies (less than 3%) were found in studies examining the following research themes, management and organization ( n  = 18), research methods in DE and knowledge transfer ( n  = 13), globalization of education and cross-cultural aspects ( n  = 13), innovation and change ( n  = 13), and costs and benefits ( n  = 12).

2.4. Online learning research themes

These three systematic reviews provide a broad understanding of distance education and online learning research themes from 1990 to 2008. However, there is an increase in the number of research studies on online learning in this decade and there is a need to identify recent research themes examined. Based on the previous systematic reviews ( Berge & Mrozowski, 2001 ; Hung, 2012 ; Tallent-Runnels et al., 2006 ; Zawacki-Richter et al., 2009 ), online learning research in this study is grouped into twelve different research themes which include Learner characteristics, Instructor characteristics, Course or program design and development, Course Facilitation, Engagement, Course Assessment, Course Technologies, Access, Culture, Equity, Inclusion, and Ethics, Leadership, Policy and Management, Instructor and Learner Support, and Learner Outcomes. Table 2 below describes each of the research themes and using these themes, a framework is derived in Fig. 1 .

Research themes in online learning.

Online learning research themes framework.

The collection of research themes is presented as a framework in Fig. 1 . The themes are organized by domain or level to underscore the nested relationship that exists. As evidenced by the assortment of themes, research can focus on any domain of delivery or associated context. The “Learner” domain captures characteristics and outcomes related to learners and their interaction within the courses. The “Course and Instructor” domain captures elements about the broader design of the course and facilitation by the instructor, and the “Organizational” domain acknowledges the contextual influences on the course. It is important to note as well that due to the nesting, research themes can cross domains. For example, the broader cultural context may be studied as it pertains to course design and development, and institutional support can include both learner support and instructor support. Likewise, engagement research can involve instructors as well as learners.

In this introduction section, we have reviewed three systematic reviews on online learning research ( Berge & Mrozowski, 2001 ; Tallent-Runnels et al., 2006 ; Zawacki-Richter et al., 2009 ). Based on these reviews and other research, we have derived twelve themes to develop an online learning research framework which is nested in three levels: learner, course and instructor, and organization.

2.5. Purpose of this research

In two out of the three previous reviews, design, learner characteristics and interaction were examined in the highest number of studies. On the other hand, cost-benefit tradeoffs, equity and accessibility, institutional and administrative factors, and globalization and cross-cultural aspects were examined in the least number of studies. One explanation for this may be that it is a function of nesting, noting that studies falling in the Organizational and Course levels may encompass several courses or many more participants within courses. However, while some research themes re-occur, there are also variations in some themes across time, suggesting the importance of research themes rise and fall over time. Thus, a critical examination of the trends in themes is helpful for understanding where research is needed most. Also, since there is no recent study examining online learning research themes in the last decade, this study strives to address that gap by focusing on recent research themes found in the literature, and also reviewing research methods and settings. Notably, one goal is to also compare findings from this decade to the previous review studies. Overall, the purpose of this study is to examine publication trends in online learning research taking place during the last ten years and compare it with the previous themes identified in other review studies. Due to the continued growth of online learning research into new contexts and among new researchers, we also examine the research methods and settings found in the studies of this review.

The following research questions are addressed in this study.

• 1. What percentage of the population of articles published in the journals reviewed from 2009 to 2018 were related to online learning and empirical?
• 2. What is the frequency of online learning research themes in the empirical online learning articles of journals reviewed from 2009 to 2018?
• 3. What is the frequency of research methods and settings that researchers employed in the empirical online learning articles of the journals reviewed from 2009 to 2018?

This five-step systematic review process described in the U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, What Works Clearinghouse Procedures and Standards Handbook, Version 4.0 ( 2017 ) was used in this systematic review: (a) developing the review protocol, (b) identifying relevant literature, (c) screening studies, (d) reviewing articles, and (e) reporting findings.

3.1. Data sources and search strategies

The Education Research Complete database was searched using the keywords below for published articles between the years 2009 and 2018 using both the Title and Keyword function for the following search terms.

“online learning" OR "online teaching" OR "online program" OR "online course" OR “online education”

3.2. Inclusion/exclusion criteria

The initial search of online learning research among journals in the database resulted in more than 3000 possible articles. Therefore, we limited our search to select journals that focus on publishing peer-reviewed online learning and educational research. Our aim was to capture the journals that published the most articles in online learning. However, we also wanted to incorporate the concept of rigor, so we used expert perception to identify 12 peer-reviewed journals that publish high-quality online learning research. Dissertations and conference proceedings were excluded. To be included in this systematic review, each study had to meet the screening criteria as described in Table 3 . A research study was excluded if it did not meet all of the criteria to be included.

Inclusion/Exclusion criteria.

3.3. Process flow selection of articles

Fig. 2 shows the process flow involved in the selection of articles. The search in the database Education Research Complete yielded an initial sample of 3332 articles. Targeting the 12 journals removed 2579 articles. After reviewing the abstracts, we removed 134 articles based on the inclusion/exclusion criteria. The final sample, consisting of 619 articles, was entered into the computer software MAXQDA ( VERBI Software, 2019 ) for coding.

Flowchart of online learning research selection.

3.4. Developing review protocol

A review protocol was designed as a codebook in MAXQDA ( VERBI Software, 2019 ) by the three researchers. The codebook was developed based on findings from the previous review studies and from the initial screening of the articles in this review. The codebook included 12 research themes listed earlier in Table 2 (Learner characteristics, Instructor characteristics, Course or program design and development, Course Facilitation, Engagement, Course Assessment, Course Technologies, Access, Culture, Equity, Inclusion, and Ethics, Leadership, Policy and Management, Instructor and Learner Support, and Learner Outcomes), four research settings (higher education, continuing education, K-12, corporate/military), and three research designs (quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods). Fig. 3 below is a screenshot of MAXQDA used for the coding process.

Codebook from MAXQDA.

3.5. Data coding

Research articles were coded by two researchers in MAXQDA. Two researchers independently coded 10% of the articles and then discussed and updated the coding framework. The second author who was a doctoral student coded the remaining studies. The researchers met bi-weekly to address coding questions that emerged. After the first phase of coding, we found that more than 100 studies fell into each of the categories of Learner Characteristics or Engagement, so we decided to pursue a second phase of coding and reexamine the two themes. Learner Characteristics were classified into the subthemes of Academic, Affective, Motivational, Self-regulation, Cognitive, and Demographic Characteristics. Engagement was classified into the subthemes of Collaborating, Communication, Community, Involvement, Interaction, Participation, and Presence.

3.6. Data analysis

Frequency tables were generated for each of the variables so that outliers could be examined and narrative data could be collapsed into categories. Once cleaned and collapsed into a reasonable number of categories, descriptive statistics were used to describe each of the coded elements. We first present the frequencies of publications related to online learning in the 12 journals. The total number of articles for each journal (collectively, the population) was hand-counted from journal websites, excluding editorials and book reviews. The publication trend of online learning research was also depicted from 2009 to 2018. Then, the descriptive information of the 12 themes, including the subthemes of Learner Characteristics and Engagement were provided. Finally, research themes by research settings and methodology were elaborated.

4.1. Publication trends on online learning

Publication patterns of the 619 articles reviewed from the 12 journals are presented in Table 4 . International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning had the highest number of publications in this review. Overall, about 8% of the articles appearing in these twelve journals consisted of online learning publications; however, several journals had concentrations of online learning articles totaling more than 20%.

Empirical online learning research articles by journal, 2009–2018.

Note . Journal's Total Article count excludes reviews and editorials.

The publication trend of online learning research is depicted in Fig. 4 . When disaggregated by year, the total frequency of publications shows an increasing trend. Online learning articles increased throughout the decade and hit a relative maximum in 2014. The greatest number of online learning articles ( n  = 86) occurred most recently, in 2018.

Online learning publication trends by year.

4.2. Online learning research themes that appeared in the selected articles

The publications were categorized into the twelve research themes identified in Fig. 1 . The frequency counts and percentages of the research themes are provided in Table 5 below. A majority of the research is categorized into the Learner domain. The fewest number of articles appears in the Organization domain.

Research themes in the online learning publications from 2009 to 2018.

The specific themes of Engagement ( n  = 179, 28.92%) and Learner Characteristics ( n  = 134, 21.65%) were most often examined in publications. These two themes were further coded to identify sub-themes, which are described in the next two sections. Publications focusing on Instructor Characteristics ( n  = 21, 3.39%) were least common in the dataset.

4.2.1. Research on engagement

The largest number of studies was on engagement in online learning, which in the online learning literature is referred to and examined through different terms. Hence, we explore this category in more detail. In this review, we categorized the articles into seven different sub-themes as examined through different lenses including presence, interaction, community, participation, collaboration, involvement, and communication. We use the term “involvement” as one of the terms since researchers sometimes broadly used the term engagement to describe their work without further description. Table 6 below provides the description, frequency, and percentages of the various studies related to engagement.

Research sub-themes on engagement.

In the sections below, we provide several examples of the different engagement sub-themes that were studied within the larger engagement theme.

Presence. This sub-theme was the most researched in engagement. With the development of the community of inquiry framework most of the studies in this subtheme examined social presence ( Akcaoglu & Lee, 2016 ; Phirangee & Malec, 2017 ; Wei et al., 2012 ), teaching presence ( Orcutt & Dringus, 2017 ; Preisman, 2014 ; Wisneski et al., 2015 ) and cognitive presence ( Archibald, 2010 ; Olesova et al., 2016 ).

Interaction . This was the second most studied theme under engagement. Researchers examined increasing interpersonal interactions ( Cung et al., 2018 ), learner-learner interactions ( Phirangee, 2016 ; Shackelford & Maxwell, 2012 ; Tawfik et al., 2018 ), peer-peer interaction ( Comer et al., 2014 ), learner-instructor interaction ( Kuo et al., 2014 ), learner-content interaction ( Zimmerman, 2012 ), interaction through peer mentoring ( Ruane & Koku, 2014 ), interaction and community building ( Thormann & Fidalgo, 2014 ), and interaction in discussions ( Ruane & Lee, 2016 ; Tibi, 2018 ).

Community. Researchers examined building community in online courses ( Berry, 2017 ), supporting a sense of community ( Jiang, 2017 ), building an online learning community of practice ( Cho, 2016 ), building an academic community ( Glazer & Wanstreet, 2011 ; Nye, 2015 ; Overbaugh & Nickel, 2011 ), and examining connectedness and rapport in an online community ( Bolliger & Inan, 2012 ; Murphy & Rodríguez-Manzanares, 2012 ; Slagter van Tryon & Bishop, 2012 ).

Participation. Researchers examined engagement through participation in a number of studies. Some of the topics include, participation patterns in online discussion ( Marbouti & Wise, 2016 ; Wise et al., 2012 ), participation in MOOCs ( Ahn et al., 2013 ; Saadatmand & Kumpulainen, 2014 ), features that influence students’ online participation ( Rye & Støkken, 2012 ) and active participation.

Collaboration. Researchers examined engagement through collaborative learning. Specific studies focused on cross-cultural collaboration ( Kumi-Yeboah, 2018 ; Yang et al., 2014 ), how virtual teams collaborate ( Verstegen et al., 2018 ), types of collaboration teams ( Wicks et al., 2015 ), tools for collaboration ( Boling et al., 2014 ), and support for collaboration ( Kopp et al., 2012 ).

Involvement. Researchers examined engaging learners through involvement in various learning activities ( Cundell & Sheepy, 2018 ), student engagement through various measures ( Dixson, 2015 ), how instructors included engagement to involve students in learning ( O'Shea et al., 2015 ), different strategies to engage the learner ( Amador & Mederer, 2013 ), and designed emotionally engaging online environments ( Koseoglu & Doering, 2011 ).

Communication. Researchers examined communication in online learning in studies using social network analysis ( Ergün & Usluel, 2016 ), using informal communication tools such as Facebook for class discussion ( Kent, 2013 ), and using various modes of communication ( Cunningham et al., 2010 ; Rowe, 2016 ). Studies have also focused on both asynchronous and synchronous aspects of communication ( Swaggerty & Broemmel, 2017 ; Yamagata-Lynch, 2014 ).

4.2.2. Research on learner characteristics

The second largest theme was learner characteristics. In this review, we explore this further to identify several aspects of learner characteristics. In this review, we categorized the learner characteristics into self-regulation characteristics, motivational characteristics, academic characteristics, affective characteristics, cognitive characteristics, and demographic characteristics. Table 7 provides the number of studies and percentages examining the various learner characteristics.

Research sub-themes on learner characteristics.

Online learning has elements that are different from the traditional face-to-face classroom and so the characteristics of the online learners are also different. Yukselturk and Top (2013) categorized online learner profile into ten aspects: gender, age, work status, self-efficacy, online readiness, self-regulation, participation in discussion list, participation in chat sessions, satisfaction, and achievement. Their categorization shows that there are differences in online learner characteristics in these aspects when compared to learners in other settings. Some of the other aspects such as participation and achievement as discussed by Yukselturk and Top (2013) are discussed in different research themes in this study. The sections below provide examples of the learner characteristics sub-themes that were studied.

Self-regulation. Several researchers have examined self-regulation in online learning. They found that successful online learners are academically motivated ( Artino & Stephens, 2009 ), have academic self-efficacy ( Cho & Shen, 2013 ), have grit and intention to succeed ( Wang & Baker, 2018 ), have time management and elaboration strategies ( Broadbent, 2017 ), set goals and revisit course content ( Kizilcec et al., 2017 ), and persist ( Glazer & Murphy, 2015 ). Researchers found a positive relationship between learner's self-regulation and interaction ( Delen et al., 2014 ) and self-regulation and communication and collaboration ( Barnard et al., 2009 ).

Motivation. Researchers focused on motivation of online learners including different motivation levels of online learners ( Li & Tsai, 2017 ), what motivated online learners ( Chaiprasurt & Esichaikul, 2013 ), differences in motivation of online learners ( Hartnett et al., 2011 ), and motivation when compared to face to face learners ( Paechter & Maier, 2010 ). Harnett et al. (2011) found that online learner motivation was complex, multifaceted, and sensitive to situational conditions.

Academic. Several researchers have focused on academic aspects for online learner characteristics. Readiness for online learning has been examined as an academic factor by several researchers ( Buzdar et al., 2016 ; Dray et al., 2011 ; Wladis & Samuels, 2016 ; Yu, 2018 ) specifically focusing on creating and validating measures to examine online learner readiness including examining students emotional intelligence as a measure of student readiness for online learning. Researchers have also examined other academic factors such as academic standing ( Bradford & Wyatt, 2010 ), course level factors ( Wladis et al., 2014 ) and academic skills in online courses ( Shea & Bidjerano, 2014 ).

Affective. Anderson and Bourke (2013) describe affective characteristics through which learners express feelings or emotions. Several research studies focused on the affective characteristics of online learners. Learner satisfaction for online learning has been examined by several researchers ( Cole et al., 2014 ; Dziuban et al., 2015 ; Kuo et al., 2013 ; Lee, 2014a ) along with examining student emotions towards online assessment ( Kim et al., 2014 ).

Cognitive. Researchers have also examined cognitive aspects of learner characteristics including meta-cognitive skills, cognitive variables, higher-order thinking, cognitive density, and critical thinking ( Chen & Wu, 2012 ; Lee, 2014b ). Lee (2014b) examined the relationship between cognitive presence density and higher-order thinking skills. Chen and Wu (2012) examined the relationship between cognitive and motivational variables in an online system for secondary physical education.

Demographic. Researchers have examined various demographic factors in online learning. Several researchers have examined gender differences in online learning ( Bayeck et al., 2018 ; Lowes et al., 2016 ; Yukselturk & Bulut, 2009 ), ethnicity, age ( Ke & Kwak, 2013 ), and minority status ( Yeboah & Smith, 2016 ) of online learners.

4.2.3. Less frequently studied research themes

While engagement and learner characteristics were studied the most, other themes were less often studied in the literature and are presented here, according to size, with general descriptions of the types of research examined for each.

Evaluation and Quality Assurance. There were 38 studies (6.14%) published in the theme of evaluation and quality assurance. Some of the studies in this theme focused on course quality standards, using quality matters to evaluate quality, using the CIPP model for evaluation, online learning system evaluation, and course and program evaluations.

Course Technologies. There were 35 studies (5.65%) published in the course technologies theme. Some of the studies examined specific technologies such as Edmodo, YouTube, Web 2.0 tools, wikis, Twitter, WebCT, Screencasts, and Web conferencing systems in the online learning context.

Course Facilitation. There were 34 studies (5.49%) published in the course facilitation theme. Some of the studies in this theme examined facilitation strategies and methods, experiences of online facilitators, and online teaching methods.

Institutional Support. There were 33 studies (5.33%) published in the institutional support theme which included support for both the instructor and learner. Some of the studies on instructor support focused on training new online instructors, mentoring programs for faculty, professional development resources for faculty, online adjunct faculty training, and institutional support for online instructors. Studies on learner support focused on learning resources for online students, cognitive and social support for online learners, and help systems for online learner support.

Learner Outcome. There were 32 studies (5.17%) published in the learner outcome theme. Some of the studies that were examined in this theme focused on online learner enrollment, completion, learner dropout, retention, and learner success.

Course Assessment. There were 30 studies (4.85%) published in the course assessment theme. Some of the studies in the course assessment theme examined online exams, peer assessment and peer feedback, proctoring in online exams, and alternative assessments such as eportfolio.

Access, Culture, Equity, Inclusion, and Ethics. There were 29 studies (4.68%) published in the access, culture, equity, inclusion, and ethics theme. Some of the studies in this theme examined online learning across cultures, multi-cultural effectiveness, multi-access, and cultural diversity in online learning.

Leadership, Policy, and Management. There were 27 studies (4.36%) published in the leadership, policy, and management theme. Some of the studies on leadership, policy, and management focused on online learning leaders, stakeholders, strategies for online learning leadership, resource requirements, university policies for online course policies, governance, course ownership, and faculty incentives for online teaching.

Course Design and Development. There were 27 studies (4.36%) published in the course design and development theme. Some of the studies examined in this theme focused on design elements, design issues, design process, design competencies, design considerations, and instructional design in online courses.

Instructor Characteristics. There were 21 studies (3.39%) published in the instructor characteristics theme. Some of the studies in this theme were on motivation and experiences of online instructors, ability to perform online teaching duties, roles of online instructors, and adjunct versus full-time online instructors.

4.3. Research settings and methodology used in the studies

The research methods used in the studies were classified into quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods ( Harwell, 2012 , pp. 147–163). The research setting was categorized into higher education, continuing education, K-12, and corporate/military. As shown in Table A in the appendix, the vast majority of the publications used higher education as the research setting ( n  = 509, 67.6%). Table B in the appendix shows that approximately half of the studies adopted the quantitative method ( n  = 324, 43.03%), followed by the qualitative method ( n  = 200, 26.56%). Mixed methods account for the smallest portion ( n  = 95, 12.62%).

Table A shows that the patterns of the four research settings were approximately consistent across the 12 themes except for the theme of Leaner Outcome and Institutional Support. Continuing education had a higher relative frequency in Learner Outcome (0.28) and K-12 had a higher relative frequency in Institutional Support (0.33) compared to the frequencies they had in the total themes (0.09 and 0.08 respectively). Table B in the appendix shows that the distribution of the three methods were not consistent across the 12 themes. While quantitative studies and qualitative studies were roughly evenly distributed in Engagement, they had a large discrepancy in Learner Characteristics. There were 100 quantitative studies; however, only 18 qualitative studies published in the theme of Learner Characteristics.

In summary, around 8% of the articles published in the 12 journals focus on online learning. Online learning publications showed a tendency of increase on the whole in the past decade, albeit fluctuated, with the greatest number occurring in 2018. Among the 12 research themes related to online learning, the themes of Engagement and Learner Characteristics were studied the most and the theme of Instructor Characteristics was studied the least. Most studies were conducted in the higher education setting and approximately half of the studies used the quantitative method. Looking at the 12 themes by setting and method, we found that the patterns of the themes by setting or by method were not consistent across the 12 themes.

The quality of our findings was ensured by scientific and thorough searches and coding consistency. The selection of the 12 journals provides evidence of the representativeness and quality of primary studies. In the coding process, any difficulties and questions were resolved by consultations with the research team at bi-weekly meetings, which ensures the intra-rater and interrater reliability of coding. All these approaches guarantee the transparency and replicability of the process and the quality of our results.

5. Discussion

This review enabled us to identify the online learning research themes examined from 2009 to 2018. In the section below, we review the most studied research themes, engagement and learner characteristics along with implications, limitations, and directions for future research.

5.1. Most studied research themes

Three out of the four systematic reviews informing the design of the present study found that online learner characteristics and online engagement were examined in a high number of studies. In this review, about half of the studies reviewed (50.57%) focused on online learner characteristics or online engagement. This shows the continued importance of these two themes. In the Tallent-Runnels et al.’s (2006) study, the learner characteristics theme was identified as least studied for which they state that researchers are beginning to investigate learner characteristics in the early days of online learning.

One of the differences found in this review is that course design and development was examined in the least number of studies in this review compared to two prior systematic reviews ( Berge & Mrozowski, 2001 ; Zawacki-Richter et al., 2009 ). Zawacki-Richter et al. did not use a keyword search but reviewed all the articles in five different distance education journals. Berge and Mrozowski (2001) included a research theme called design issues to include all aspects of instructional systems design in distance education journals. In our study, in addition to course design and development, we also had focused themes on learner outcomes, course facilitation, course assessment and course evaluation. These are all instructional design focused topics and since we had multiple themes focusing on instructional design topics, the course design and development category might have resulted in fewer studies. There is still a need for more studies to focus on online course design and development.

5.2. Least frequently studied research themes

Three out of the four systematic reviews discussed in the opening of this study found management and organization factors to be least studied. In this review, Leadership, Policy, and Management was studied among 4.36% of the studies and Access, Culture, Equity, Inclusion, and Ethics was studied among 4.68% of the studies in the organizational level. The theme on Equity and accessibility was also found to be the least studied theme in the Berge and Mrozowski (2001) study. In addition, instructor characteristics was the least examined research theme among the twelve themes studied in this review. Only 3.39% of the studies were on instructor characteristics. While there were some studies examining instructor motivation and experiences, instructor ability to teach online, online instructor roles, and adjunct versus full-time online instructors, there is still a need to examine topics focused on instructors and online teaching. This theme was not included in the prior reviews as the focus was more on the learner and the course but not on the instructor. While it is helpful to see research evolving on instructor focused topics, there is still a need for more research on the online instructor.

5.3. Comparing research themes from current study to previous studies

The research themes from this review were compared with research themes from previous systematic reviews, which targeted prior decades. Table 8 shows the comparison.

Comparison of most and least studied online learning research themes from current to previous reviews.

L = Learner, C=Course O=Organization.

5.4. Need for more studies on organizational level themes of online learning

In this review there is a greater concentration of studies focused on Learner domain topics, and reduced attention to broader more encompassing research themes that fall into the Course and Organization domains. There is a need for organizational level topics such as Access, Culture, Equity, Inclusion and Ethics, and Leadership, Policy and Management to be researched on within the context of online learning. Examination of access, culture, equity, inclusion and ethics is very important to support diverse online learners, particularly with the rapid expansion of online learning across all educational levels. This was also least studied based on Berge and Mrozowski (2001) systematic review.

The topics on leadership, policy and management were least studied both in this review and also in the Tallent-Runnels et al. (2006) and Zawacki-Richter et al. (2009) study. Tallent-Runnels categorized institutional and administrative aspects into institutional policies, institutional support, and enrollment effects. While we included support as a separate category, in this study leadership, policy and management were combined. There is still a need for research on leadership of those who manage online learning, policies for online education, and managing online programs. In the Zawacki-Richter et al. (2009) study, only a few studies examined management and organization focused topics. They also found management and organization to be strongly correlated with costs and benefits. In our study, costs and benefits were collectively included as an aspect of management and organization and not as a theme by itself. These studies will provide research-based evidence for online education administrators.

6. Limitations

As with any systematic review, there are limitations to the scope of the review. The search is limited to twelve journals in the field that typically include research on online learning. These manuscripts were identified by searching the Education Research Complete database which focuses on education students, professionals, and policymakers. Other discipline-specific journals as well as dissertations and proceedings were not included due to the volume of articles. Also, the search was performed using five search terms “online learning" OR "online teaching" OR "online program" OR "online course" OR “online education” in title and keyword. If authors did not include these terms, their respective work may have been excluded from this review even if it focused on online learning. While these terms are commonly used in North America, it may not be commonly used in other parts of the world. Additional studies may exist outside this scope.

The search strategy also affected how we presented results and introduced limitations regarding generalization. We identified that only 8% of the articles published in these journals were related to online learning; however, given the use of search terms to identify articles within select journals it was not feasible to identify the total number of research-based articles in the population. Furthermore, our review focused on the topics and general methods of research and did not systematically consider the quality of the published research. Lastly, some journals may have preferences for publishing studies on a particular topic or that use a particular method (e.g., quantitative methods), which introduces possible selection and publication biases which may skew the interpretation of results due to over/under representation. Future studies are recommended to include more journals to minimize the selection bias and obtain a more representative sample.

Certain limitations can be attributed to the coding process. Overall, the coding process for this review worked well for most articles, as each tended to have an individual or dominant focus as described in the abstracts, though several did mention other categories which likely were simultaneously considered to a lesser degree. However, in some cases, a dominant theme was not as apparent and an effort to create mutually exclusive groups for clearer interpretation the coders were occasionally forced to choose between two categories. To facilitate this coding, the full-texts were used to identify a study focus through a consensus seeking discussion among all authors. Likewise, some studies focused on topics that we have associated with a particular domain, but the design of the study may have promoted an aggregated examination or integrated factors from multiple domains (e.g., engagement). Due to our reliance on author descriptions, the impact of construct validity is likely a concern that requires additional exploration. Our final grouping of codes may not have aligned with the original author's description in the abstract. Additionally, coding of broader constructs which disproportionately occur in the Learner domain, such as learner outcomes, learner characteristics, and engagement, likely introduced bias towards these codes when considering studies that involved multiple domains. Additional refinement to explore the intersection of domains within studies is needed.

7. Implications and future research

One of the strengths of this review is the research categories we have identified. We hope these categories will support future researchers and identify areas and levels of need for future research. Overall, there is some agreement on research themes on online learning research among previous reviews and this one, at the same time there are some contradicting findings. We hope the most-researched themes and least-researched themes provide authors a direction on the importance of research and areas of need to focus on.

The leading themes found in this review is online engagement research. However, presentation of this research was inconsistent, and often lacked specificity. This is not unique to online environments, but the nuances of defining engagement in an online environment are unique and therefore need further investigation and clarification. This review points to seven distinct classifications of online engagement. Further research on engagement should indicate which type of engagement is sought. This level of specificity is necessary to establish instruments for measuring engagement and ultimately testing frameworks for classifying engagement and promoting it in online environments. Also, it might be of importance to examine the relationship between these seven sub-themes of engagement.

Additionally, this review highlights growing attention to learner characteristics, which constitutes a shift in focus away from instructional characteristics and course design. Although this is consistent with the focus on engagement, the role of the instructor, and course design with respect to these outcomes remains important. Results of the learner characteristics and engagement research paired with course design will have important ramifications for the use of teaching and learning professionals who support instruction. Additionally, the review also points to a concentration of research in the area of higher education. With an immediate and growing emphasis on online learning in K-12 and corporate settings, there is a critical need for further investigation in these settings.

Lastly, because the present review did not focus on the overall effect of interventions, opportunities exist for dedicated meta-analyses. Particular attention to research on engagement and learner characteristics as well as how these vary by study design and outcomes would be logical additions to the research literature.

8. Conclusion

This systematic review builds upon three previous reviews which tackled the topic of online learning between 1990 and 2010 by extending the timeframe to consider the most recent set of published research. Covering the most recent decade, our review of 619 articles from 12 leading online learning journal points to a more concentrated focus on the learner domain including engagement and learner characteristics, with more limited attention to topics pertaining to the classroom or organizational level. The review highlights an opportunity for the field to clarify terminology concerning online learning research, particularly in the areas of learner outcomes where there is a tendency to classify research more generally (e.g., engagement). Using this sample of published literature, we provide a possible taxonomy for categorizing this research using subcategories. The field could benefit from a broader conversation about how these categories can shape a comprehensive framework for online learning research. Such efforts will enable the field to effectively prioritize research aims over time and synthesize effects.

Credit author statement

Florence Martin: Conceptualization; Writing - original draft, Writing - review & editing Preparation, Supervision, Project administration. Ting Sun: Methodology, Formal analysis, Writing - original draft, Writing - review & editing. Carl Westine: Methodology, Formal analysis, Writing - original draft, Writing - review & editing, Supervision

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

1 Includes articles that are cited in this manuscript and also included in the systematic review. The entire list of 619 articles used in the systematic review can be obtained by emailing the authors.*

Appendix B Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104009 .

Appendix A. 

Research Themes by the Settings in the Online Learning Publications

Research Themes by the Methodology in the Online Learning Publications

Appendix B. Supplementary data

The following are the Supplementary data to this article:

References 1

• Ahn J., Butler B.S., Alam A., Webster S.A. Learner participation and engagement in open online courses: Insights from the Peer 2 Peer University. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching. 2013; 9 (2):160–171. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Akcaoglu M., Lee E. Increasing social presence in online learning through small group discussions. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning. 2016; 17 (3) * [ Google Scholar ]
• Allen I.E., Seaman J. Babson survey research group; 2017. Digital compass learning: Distance education enrollment Report 2017. [ Google Scholar ]
• Amador J.A., Mederer H. Migrating successful student engagement strategies online: Opportunities and challenges using jigsaw groups and problem-based learning. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching. 2013; 9 (1):89. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Anderson L.W., Bourke S.F. Routledge; 2013. Assessing affective characteristics in the schools. [ Google Scholar ]
• Archibald D. Fostering the development of cognitive presence: Initial findings using the community of inquiry survey instrument. The Internet and Higher Education. 2010; 13 (1–2):73–74. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Artino A.R., Jr., Stephens J.M. Academic motivation and self-regulation: A comparative analysis of undergraduate and graduate students learning online. The Internet and Higher Education. 2009; 12 (3–4):146–151. [ Google Scholar ]
• Barnard L., Lan W.Y., To Y.M., Paton V.O., Lai S.L. Measuring self-regulation in online and blended learning environments. Internet and Higher Education. 2009; 12 (1):1–6. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Bayeck R.Y., Hristova A., Jablokow K.W., Bonafini F. Exploring the relevance of single‐gender group formation: What we learn from a massive open online course (MOOC) British Journal of Educational Technology. 2018; 49 (1):88–100. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Berge Z., Mrozowski S. Review of research in distance education, 1990 to 1999. American Journal of Distance Education. 2001; 15 (3):5–19. doi: 10.1080/08923640109527090. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Berry S. Building community in online doctoral classrooms: Instructor practices that support community. Online Learning. 2017; 21 (2):n2. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Boling E.C., Holan E., Horbatt B., Hough M., Jean-Louis J., Khurana C., Spiezio C. Using online tools for communication and collaboration: Understanding educators' experiences in an online course. The Internet and Higher Education. 2014; 23 :48–55. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Bolliger D.U., Inan F.A. Development and validation of the online student connectedness survey (OSCS) International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning. 2012; 13 (3):41–65. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Bradford G., Wyatt S. Online learning and student satisfaction: Academic standing, ethnicity and their influence on facilitated learning, engagement, and information fluency. The Internet and Higher Education. 2010; 13 (3):108–114. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Broadbent J. Comparing online and blended learner's self-regulated learning strategies and academic performance. The Internet and Higher Education. 2017; 33 :24–32. [ Google Scholar ]
• Buzdar M., Ali A., Tariq R. Emotional intelligence as a determinant of readiness for online learning. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning. 2016; 17 (1) * [ Google Scholar ]
• Capdeferro N., Romero M., Barberà E. Polychronicity: Review of the literature and a new configuration for the study of this hidden dimension of online learning. Distance Education. 2014; 35 (3):294–310. [ Google Scholar ]
• Chaiprasurt C., Esichaikul V. Enhancing motivation in online courses with mobile communication tool support: A comparative study. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning. 2013; 14 (3):377–401. [ Google Scholar ]
• Chen C.H., Wu I.C. The interplay between cognitive and motivational variables in a supportive online learning system for secondary physical education. Computers & Education. 2012; 58 (1):542–550. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Cho H. Under co-construction: An online community of practice for bilingual pre-service teachers. Computers & Education. 2016; 92 :76–89. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Cho M.H., Shen D. Self-regulation in online learning. Distance Education. 2013; 34 (3):290–301. [ Google Scholar ]
• Cole M.T., Shelley D.J., Swartz L.B. Online instruction, e-learning, and student satisfaction: A three-year study. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning. 2014; 15 (6) * [ Google Scholar ]
• Comer D.K., Clark C.R., Canelas D.A. Writing to learn and learning to write across the disciplines: Peer-to-peer writing in introductory-level MOOCs. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning. 2014; 15 (5):26–82. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Cundell A., Sheepy E. Student perceptions of the most effective and engaging online learning activities in a blended graduate seminar. Online Learning. 2018; 22 (3):87–102. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Cung B., Xu D., Eichhorn S. Increasing interpersonal interactions in an online course: Does increased instructor email activity and voluntary meeting time in a physical classroom facilitate student learning? Online Learning. 2018; 22 (3):193–215. [ Google Scholar ]
• Cunningham U.M., Fägersten K.B., Holmsten E. Can you hear me, Hanoi?" Compensatory mechanisms employed in synchronous net-based English language learning. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning. 2010; 11 (1):161–177. [ Google Scholar ]
• Davis D., Chen G., Hauff C., Houben G.J. Activating learning at scale: A review of innovations in online learning strategies. Computers & Education. 2018; 125 :327–344. [ Google Scholar ]
• Delen E., Liew J., Willson V. Effects of interactivity and instructional scaffolding on learning: Self-regulation in online video-based environments. Computers & Education. 2014; 78 :312–320. [ Google Scholar ]
• Dixson M.D. Measuring student engagement in the online course: The Online Student Engagement scale (OSE) Online Learning. 2015; 19 (4):n4. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Dray B.J., Lowenthal P.R., Miszkiewicz M.J., Ruiz‐Primo M.A., Marczynski K. Developing an instrument to assess student readiness for online learning: A validation study. Distance Education. 2011; 32 (1):29–47. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Dziuban C., Moskal P., Thompson J., Kramer L., DeCantis G., Hermsdorfer A. Student satisfaction with online learning: Is it a psychological contract? Online Learning. 2015; 19 (2):n2. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Ergün E., Usluel Y.K. An analysis of density and degree-centrality according to the social networking structure formed in an online learning environment. Journal of Educational Technology & Society. 2016; 19 (4):34–46. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Esfijani A. Measuring quality in online education: A meta-synthesis. American Journal of Distance Education. 2018; 32 (1):57–73. [ Google Scholar ]
• Glazer H.R., Murphy J.A. Optimizing success: A model for persistence in online education. American Journal of Distance Education. 2015; 29 (2):135–144. [ Google Scholar ]
• Glazer H.R., Wanstreet C.E. Connection to the academic community: Perceptions of students in online education. Quarterly Review of Distance Education. 2011; 12 (1):55. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Hartnett M., George A.S., Dron J. Examining motivation in online distance learning environments: Complex, multifaceted and situation-dependent. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning. 2011; 12 (6):20–38. [ Google Scholar ]
• Harwell M.R. 2012. Research design in qualitative/quantitative/mixed methods. Section III. Opportunities and challenges in designing and conducting inquiry. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hung J.L. Trends of e‐learning research from 2000 to 2008: Use of text mining and bibliometrics. British Journal of Educational Technology. 2012; 43 (1):5–16. [ Google Scholar ]
• Jiang W. Interdependence of roles, role rotation, and sense of community in an online course. Distance Education. 2017; 38 (1):84–105. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ke F., Kwak D. Online learning across ethnicity and age: A study on learning interaction participation, perception, and learning satisfaction. Computers & Education. 2013; 61 :43–51. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kent M. Changing the conversation: Facebook as a venue for online class discussion in higher education. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching. 2013; 9 (4):546–565. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Kim C., Park S.W., Cozart J. Affective and motivational factors of learning in online mathematics courses. British Journal of Educational Technology. 2014; 45 (1):171–185. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kizilcec R.F., Pérez-Sanagustín M., Maldonado J.J. Self-regulated learning strategies predict learner behavior and goal attainment in Massive Open Online Courses. Computers & Education. 2017; 104 :18–33. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kopp B., Matteucci M.C., Tomasetto C. E-tutorial support for collaborative online learning: An explorative study on experienced and inexperienced e-tutors. Computers & Education. 2012; 58 (1):12–20. [ Google Scholar ]
• Koseoglu S., Doering A. Understanding complex ecologies: An investigation of student experiences in adventure learning programs. Distance Education. 2011; 32 (3):339–355. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Kumi-Yeboah A. Designing a cross-cultural collaborative online learning framework for online instructors. Online Learning. 2018; 22 (4):181–201. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Kuo Y.C., Walker A.E., Belland B.R., Schroder K.E. A predictive study of student satisfaction in online education programs. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning. 2013; 14 (1):16–39. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Kuo Y.C., Walker A.E., Schroder K.E., Belland B.R. Interaction, Internet self-efficacy, and self-regulated learning as predictors of student satisfaction in online education courses. Internet and Higher Education. 2014; 20 :35–50. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Lee J. An exploratory study of effective online learning: Assessing satisfaction levels of graduate students of mathematics education associated with human and design factors of an online course. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning. 2014; 15 (1) [ Google Scholar ]
• Lee S.M. The relationships between higher order thinking skills, cognitive density, and social presence in online learning. The Internet and Higher Education. 2014; 21 :41–52. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Lee K. Rethinking the accessibility of online higher education: A historical review. The Internet and Higher Education. 2017; 33 :15–23. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lee Y., Choi J. A review of online course dropout research: Implications for practice and future research. Educational Technology Research & Development. 2011; 59 (5):593–618. [ Google Scholar ]
• Li L.Y., Tsai C.C. Accessing online learning material: Quantitative behavior patterns and their effects on motivation and learning performance. Computers & Education. 2017; 114 :286–297. [ Google Scholar ]
• Liyanagunawardena T., Adams A., Williams S. MOOCs: A systematic study of the published literature 2008-2012. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning. 2013; 14 (3):202–227. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lowes S., Lin P., Kinghorn B.R. Gender differences in online high school courses. Online Learning. 2016; 20 (4):100–117. [ Google Scholar ]
• Marbouti F., Wise A.F. Starburst: A new graphical interface to support purposeful attention to others' posts in online discussions. Educational Technology Research & Development. 2016; 64 (1):87–113. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Martin F., Ahlgrim-Delzell L., Budhrani K. Systematic review of two decades (1995 to 2014) of research on synchronous online learning. American Journal of Distance Education. 2017; 31 (1):3–19. [ Google Scholar ]
• Moore-Adams B.L., Jones W.M., Cohen J. Learning to teach online: A systematic review of the literature on K-12 teacher preparation for teaching online. Distance Education. 2016; 37 (3):333–348. [ Google Scholar ]
• Murphy E., Rodríguez-Manzanares M.A. Rapport in distance education. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning. 2012; 13 (1):167–190. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Nye A. Building an online academic learning community among undergraduate students. Distance Education. 2015; 36 (1):115–128. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Olesova L., Slavin M., Lim J. Exploring the effect of scripted roles on cognitive presence in asynchronous online discussions. Online Learning. 2016; 20 (4):34–53. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Orcutt J.M., Dringus L.P. Beyond being there: Practices that establish presence, engage students and influence intellectual curiosity in a structured online learning environment. Online Learning. 2017; 21 (3):15–35. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Overbaugh R.C., Nickel C.E. A comparison of student satisfaction and value of academic community between blended and online sections of a university-level educational foundations course. The Internet and Higher Education. 2011; 14 (3):164–174. * [ Google Scholar ]
• O'Shea S., Stone C., Delahunty J. “I ‘feel’like I am at university even though I am online.” Exploring how students narrate their engagement with higher education institutions in an online learning environment. Distance Education. 2015; 36 (1):41–58. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Paechter M., Maier B. Online or face-to-face? Students' experiences and preferences in e-learning. Internet and Higher Education. 2010; 13 (4):292–297. [ Google Scholar ]
• Phirangee K. Students' perceptions of learner-learner interactions that weaken a sense of community in an online learning environment. Online Learning. 2016; 20 (4):13–33. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Phirangee K., Malec A. Othering in online learning: An examination of social presence, identity, and sense of community. Distance Education. 2017; 38 (2):160–172. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Preisman K.A. Teaching presence in online education: From the instructor's point of view. Online Learning. 2014; 18 (3):n3. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Rowe M. Developing graduate attributes in an open online course. British Journal of Educational Technology. 2016; 47 (5):873–882. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Ruane R., Koku E.F. Social network analysis of undergraduate education student interaction in online peer mentoring settings. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching. 2014; 10 (4):577–589. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Ruane R., Lee V.J. Analysis of discussion board interaction in an online peer mentoring site. Online Learning. 2016; 20 (4):79–99. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Rye S.A., Støkken A.M. The implications of the local context in global virtual education. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning. 2012; 13 (1):191–206. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Saadatmand M., Kumpulainen K. Participants' perceptions of learning and networking in connectivist MOOCs. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching. 2014; 10 (1):16. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Shackelford J.L., Maxwell M. Sense of community in graduate online education: Contribution of learner to learner interaction. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning. 2012; 13 (4):228–249. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Shea P., Bidjerano T. Does online learning impede degree completion? A national study of community college students. Computers & Education. 2014; 75 :103–111. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Sherry L. Issues in distance learning. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications. 1996; 1 (4):337–365. [ Google Scholar ]
• Slagter van Tryon P.J., Bishop M.J. Evaluating social connectedness online: The design and development of the social perceptions in learning contexts instrument. Distance Education. 2012; 33 (3):347–364. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Swaggerty E.A., Broemmel A.D. Authenticity, relevance, and connectedness: Graduate students' learning preferences and experiences in an online reading education course. The Internet and Higher Education. 2017; 32 :80–86. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Tallent-Runnels M.K., Thomas J.A., Lan W.Y., Cooper S., Ahern T.C., Shaw S.M., Liu X. Teaching courses online: A review of the research. Review of Educational Research. 2006; 76 (1):93–135. doi: 10.3102/00346543076001093. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tawfik A.A., Giabbanelli P.J., Hogan M., Msilu F., Gill A., York C.S. Effects of success v failure cases on learner-learner interaction. Computers & Education. 2018; 118 :120–132. [ Google Scholar ]
• Thomas J. Exploring the use of asynchronous online discussion in health care education: A literature review. Computers & Education. 2013; 69 :199–215. [ Google Scholar ]
• Thormann J., Fidalgo P. Guidelines for online course moderation and community building from a student's perspective. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching. 2014; 10 (3):374–388. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Tibi M.H. Computer science students' attitudes towards the use of structured and unstructured discussion forums in fully online courses. Online Learning. 2018; 22 (1):93–106. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Tsai C.W., Chiang Y.C. Research trends in problem‐based learning (pbl) research in e‐learning and online education environments: A review of publications in SSCI‐indexed journals from 2004 to 2012. British Journal of Educational Technology. 2013; 44 (6):E185–E190. [ Google Scholar ]
• Tsai C.W., Fan Y.T. Research trends in game‐based learning research in online learning environments: A review of studies published in SSCI‐indexed journals from 2003 to 2012. British Journal of Educational Technology. 2013; 44 (5):E115–E119. [ Google Scholar ]
• Tsai C.W., Shen P.D., Chiang Y.C. Research trends in meaningful learning research on e‐learning and online education environments: A review of studies published in SSCI‐indexed journals from 2003 to 2012. British Journal of Educational Technology. 2013; 44 (6):E179–E184. [ Google Scholar ]
• Tsai C.W., Shen P.D., Fan Y.T. Research trends in self‐regulated learning research in online learning environments: A review of studies published in selected journals from 2003 to 2012. British Journal of Educational Technology. 2013; 44 (5):E107–E110. [ Google Scholar ]
• U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences . InstituteofEducationSciences; Washington,DC: 2017. What Works Clearinghouse procedures and standards handbook, version3.0. https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Docs/referenceresources/wwc_procedures_v3_0_standards_handbook.pdf Retrievedfrom. [ Google Scholar ]
• Veletsianos G., Shepherdson P. A systematic analysis and synthesis of the empirical MOOC literature published in 2013–2015. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning. 2016; 17 (2) [ Google Scholar ]
• VERBI Software . 2019. MAXQDA 2020 online manual. Retrieved from maxqda. Com/help-max20/welcome [ Google Scholar ]
• Verstegen D., Dailey-Hebert A., Fonteijn H., Clarebout G., Spruijt A. How do virtual teams collaborate in online learning tasks in a MOOC? International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning. 2018; 19 (4) * [ Google Scholar ]
• Wang Y., Baker R. Grit and intention: Why do learners complete MOOCs? International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning. 2018; 19 (3) * [ Google Scholar ]
• Wei C.W., Chen N.S., Kinshuk A model for social presence in online classrooms. Educational Technology Research & Development. 2012; 60 (3):529–545. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Wicks D., Craft B.B., Lee D., Lumpe A., Henrikson R., Baliram N., Wicks K. An evaluation of low versus high collaboration in online learning. Online Learning. 2015; 19 (4):n4. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Wise A.F., Perera N., Hsiao Y.T., Speer J., Marbouti F. Microanalytic case studies of individual participation patterns in an asynchronous online discussion in an undergraduate blended course. The Internet and Higher Education. 2012; 15 (2):108–117. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Wisneski J.E., Ozogul G., Bichelmeyer B.A. Does teaching presence transfer between MBA teaching environments? A comparative investigation of instructional design practices associated with teaching presence. The Internet and Higher Education. 2015; 25 :18–27. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Wladis C., Hachey A.C., Conway K. An investigation of course-level factors as predictors of online STEM course outcomes. Computers & Education. 2014; 77 :145–150. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Wladis C., Samuels J. Do online readiness surveys do what they claim? Validity, reliability, and subsequent student enrollment decisions. Computers & Education. 2016; 98 :39–56. [ Google Scholar ]
• Yamagata-Lynch L.C. Blending online asynchronous and synchronous learning. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning. 2014; 15 (2) * [ Google Scholar ]
• Yang J., Kinshuk, Yu H., Chen S.J., Huang R. Strategies for smooth and effective cross-cultural online collaborative learning. Journal of Educational Technology & Society. 2014; 17 (3):208–221. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Yeboah A.K., Smith P. Relationships between minority students online learning experiences and academic performance. Online Learning. 2016; 20 (4):n4. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Yu T. Examining construct validity of the student online learning readiness (SOLR) instrument using confirmatory factor analysis. Online Learning. 2018; 22 (4):277–288. * [ Google Scholar ]
• Yukselturk E., Bulut S. Gender differences in self-regulated online learning environment. Educational Technology & Society. 2009; 12 (3):12–22. [ Google Scholar ]
• Yukselturk E., Top E. Exploring the link among entry characteristics, participation behaviors and course outcomes of online learners: An examination of learner profile using cluster analysis. British Journal of Educational Technology. 2013; 44 (5):716–728. [ Google Scholar ]
• Zawacki-Richter O., Backer E., Vogt S. Review of distance education research (2000 to 2008): Analysis of research areas, methods, and authorship patterns. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning. 2009; 10 (6):30. doi: 10.19173/irrodl.v10i6.741. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zhu M., Sari A., Lee M.M. A systematic review of research methods and topics of the empirical MOOC literature (2014–2016) The Internet and Higher Education. 2018; 37 :31–39. [ Google Scholar ]
• Zimmerman T.D. Exploring learner to content interaction as a success factor in online courses. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning. 2012; 13 (4):152–165. [ Google Scholar ]

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Distance Education Literature Review

The purpose of this literature review was to investigate distance education as a means of reaching and teaching education majors. More and more universities and colleges are offering distance education programs to individuals seeking teacher certification. Who are the individuals taking classes via distance education to become certified teachers or continue their professional development in education? What are the pro’s and con’s of getting certified online? What measures need to be taken to ensure that these programs are producing teachers of the same caliber as on-campus programs? Exploring answers to these questions will help to validate the advantages of distance education programs that certify teachers, provide guidance to course designers (be they faculty or education consultants), and point administrators to the kinds of policies that need to be in place to guarantee equivalency in quality.

Related Papers

Appalachian Collaborative Center For Learning

Robert Mayes

American Journal of Distance Education

Susan Zvacek

American journal of Engineering Research (AJER)

Teaching and learning are no longer confined to the classroom or the school day. There are many technologies that can offer a great deal of flexibility in when, where, and how education is distributed. The Teacher's Guide to Distance Learning is intended for K-12 educators who are interested in implementing distance learning technologies. It provides an overview of the advantages and characteristics of the various technologies now being used to reach remote learners. Distance learning provides "access to learning when the source of information and the learners are separated by time and distance, or both." Distance education courses that require a physical on-site presence for any reason (excluding taking examinations) may be referred to as hybrid or blended courses of study. Massive open online courses (MOOCs), aimed at large-scale interactive participation and open access via the web or other network technologies, are recent developments in distance education. A number of other terms are used roughly synonymously with distance education. However distance is the oldest and mostly commonly used term globally. It is also the broadest term and has the largest collection of related research articles. The main objective of this paper is develop an understanding of the characteristics and needs of distant students with little first-hand experience and limited, if any, face-to-face contact. According to the definition by the United States Distance Learning Association (USDLA), distance learning is any mediated instruction that occurs at a distance – regardless of the technology involved. So although you probably imagine online degrees that involve using websites, email, and video casts, corresponding through regular mail or talking over the phone are methods that also technically qualify. Still, in practical terms, most of what constitutes distance learning today is done by using electronic means. Teaching programs utilize not only computers, but satellites, video phones, interactive graphics, response terminals, and more. It is also something that occurs in a wide variety of fields and locations, reaching well beyond K-12 and college campuses to include corporate, government, and military training, telemedicine, and anyone interested in lifelong learning. Distance learning is especially important for those who lived in rural or otherwise underserved communities, as well as individuals whose own physical and mental limitations impair their ability to attend traditional educational settings. Key players in distance education typically include students, faculty, facilitators, support staff, and administrators, each of whom have very different roles. Meeting the instructional needs of students is the main goal of every effective distance education program. Regardless of the educational context, the primary role of the student is to learn. But the success of any distance education effort depends primarily on its faculty. Special challenges confront those teaching at a distance. For example, the instructor must:  Develop an understanding of the characteristics and needs of distant students with little first-hand experience and limited, if any, face-to-face contact.  Adapt teaching styles taking into consideration the needs and expectations of multiple, often diverse, audiences.  Develop a working understanding of delivery technology, while remaining focused on their teaching role.  Function effectively as a skilled facilitator as well as content provider.

Siemens, G., Gašević, D., & Dawson, S. (Eds.), Preparing for the digital university: A review of the history and current state of distance, blended, and online learning

Vitomir Kovanovic , Srecko Joksimovic

This report is one of a series of reports describing the historical developments and current state of distance education, online learning, and blended learning. with the intent of informing future research and practice in the emerging discipline of digital learning, this tertiary study focuses on the history and state of distance education, and the understanding of the large body of empirical research as captured by secondary studies (i.e., meta-analyses and systematic literature reviews). we conducted an automated search for secondary studies in several online digital libraries, and a manual search through Google Scholar and the ten most relevant academic journals. Our search identified 339 secondary studies in the domains of distance education, online learning, and blended learning. of those, 37 secondary studies on distance education research and practice met the selection criteria for final inclusion in our study. Based on the analysis of these secondary sources, three main themes emerged: i) comparison of distance education and traditional classroom instruction, ii) identification of important factors of distance education delivery, and iii) factors of institutional adoption of distance education. our results indicate that distance education, when properly planned, designed, and supported by the appropriate mix of technology and pedagogy, is equivalent to, or in certain scenarios more effective than, traditional face-to-face classroom instruction. This highlights the importance of instructional design and the active role of institutions play in providing support structures for instructors and learners. The implications for future research and practice are discussed.

Randall Davies

Farhad Saba

The practice of distance education in the United States is traced back to its early roots. In the 20th century, distance education remained at the periphery in corporate training, K–12 schools, and most universities, but it gradually developed its practice by using broadcast media, and later the Internet. Since the turn of the current century, distance education has seen an unprecedented growth in the US. Antecedent to this growth is the emergence of a post-industrial economy as well as expanded theory building and research in the discipline. The future of distance education depends on how successfully established institutions can adapt themselves to the post-industrial environment by adopting key theoretical concepts and implementing research findings, and how institutions are able to reduce the cost of education while increasing access.

Christopher Zirkle

The use of distance education at postsecondary levels continues to grow, including utilization in career and technical teacher education. Despite distance education's " learn anytime, anywhere " approach, there can be significant institutional, faculty/instruction and student/learner barriers to implementation. This study examined the perceptions of one state's career and technical teacher educators with respect to these barriers. The study also sought to determine demographic characteristics of the educational institutions involved in distance education, including the number of distance education courses and programs offered.

AACE Journal

Ann Riedling

Distance education has become a core educational strategy in the 1990's, with a reach that extends to a broad cross-section of institutions and curriculum providers. It has been shown that technology is a fac- tor in the blurring of the boundaries between distance learning and the traditional classroom. This arti- cle explores the evolution of distance education and discusses prior research concerning distance learn- ing formats. The Internet is currently providing mechanisms for fundamental changes in the way peo- ple learn. Nine areas regarding the Internet and distance education are explained. In addition, sum- maries of computer networking advantages over other distance technologies are revealed. When decid- ing which technology is best, one must remain focused on instructional outcomes, not the technology of delivery. Keys to effective distance learning are explained and overviews of compressed video and com- puter distance education are described. The use of telecommunicat...

Teachers College Record

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

RELATED PAPERS

Journal of Research on Technology in Education

Leanna Archambault

Tella, S. (ed.) Aspects of Media Education: Strategic Imperatives in the Information Age. Media Education Centre. Department of Teacher Education. University of Helsinki. Media Education Publications 8, 291–305.

Seppo Tella

bdistancia.cuaed.unam.mx

Cathy Cavanaugh

Research in Higher Education

Nathaniel Bray , Claire Major

The Journal of Physician Assistant Education

Randy Danielsen

Xuan An Nguyen

Eleazar hernandez vasquez

Eugene Kowch

Susan Murray

Christian Wiliiam Nandrasana Zafimahita

Encyclopedia of E-Leadership, Counseling and Training

Harun Yilmaz

Adnan Qayyum

Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration

Abbie Brown

The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning

Eva Maria Baecker

Teaching and Teacher Education

Allan Young

American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education

Evan Robinson

Educational Technology

Richard West

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

A Systematic Literature Review of the Impact of using Artificial Intelligence (AI) Tools in English Language Teaching and Learning

• September 2024
• International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development 13(3)

• This person is not on ResearchGate, or hasn't claimed this research yet.

Discover the world's research

• 25+ million members
• 160+ million publication pages
• 2.3+ billion citations

• Kanpabhat Suwanwihok
• Renu Muenjanchoey

• Mustopa Mustopa
• Nasikhin Nasikhin
• Rikza Chamami

• Laura Butler
• Louise Starkey
• Recruit researchers
• Join for free
• Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up

• The Open University
• Accessibility hub
• Guest user / Sign out
• Study with The Open University

My OpenLearn Profile

Personalise your OpenLearn profile, save your favourite content and get recognition for your learning

Approaching language, literature and childhood

Course description

Course content, course reviews.

Studying children's literature allows us to learn not just about the books that children are reading, but also about what role reading plays in childhood, and how our ideas about childhood affect the books that they read. In this free course, you will be introduced to some of the key questions that the study of children's literature raises, such as: how do children acquire and use languages and literacies? Why (and how) is language important in children’s literature? Why (and how) is literature important for children and young adults? How is childhood socially constructed? And how is the child represented in literature?

This OpenLearn course is an adapted extract from the Open University course  L310 Language, literature and childhood .

Course learning outcomes

After studying this course, you should be able to:

discuss some of the different theories, approaches and debates in the interdisciplinary field of children's literature

reflect on your own and others' memories of children's literature

consider how the academic disciplines of literature and childhood intersect, bringing different perspectives to the field

describe how texts for children and young people convey and challenge ideas around diversity through an exploration of ethnic diversity.

First Published: 13/09/2024

Updated: 13/09/2024

Rate and Review

Rate this course, review this course.

Log into OpenLearn to leave reviews and join in the conversation.

Create an account to get more

Track your progress.

Review and track your learning through your OpenLearn Profile.

Statement of Participation

On completion of a course you will earn a Statement of Participation.

Access all course activities

Take course quizzes and access all learning.

Review the course

When you have finished a course leave a review and tell others what you think.

For further information, take a look at our frequently asked questions which may give you the support you need.

About this free course

Become an ou student, download this course, share this free course.