A Meta-Analysis of Three Types of Interaction Treatments in Distance Education

This meta-analysis of the experimental literature of distance education (DE) compares different types of interaction treatments (ITs) with other DE instructional treatments. ITs are the instructional and/or media conditions designed into DE courses, which are intended to facilitate student–student (SS), student–teacher (ST), or student–content (SC) interactions. Seventy-four DE versus DE studies that contained at least one IT are included in the meta-analysis, which yield 74 achievement effects. The effect size valences are structured so that the IT or the stronger IT (i.e., in the case of two ITs) serve as the experimental condition and the other treatment, the control condition. Effects are categorized as SS, ST, or SC. After adjustment for methodological quality, the overall weighted average effect size for achievement is 0.38 and is heterogeneous. Overall, the results support the importance of the three types of ITs and strength of ITs is found to be associated with increasing achievement outcomes. A strong association is found between strength and achievement for asynchronous DE courses compared to courses containing mediated synchronous or face-to-face interaction. The results are interpreted in terms of increased cognitive engagement that is presumed to be promoted by strengthening ITs in DE courses.

[1]  Malcolm Campbell,et al.  Online vs. face-to-face discussion in a Web-based research methods course for postgraduate nursing students: a quasi-experimental study. , 2008, International journal of nursing studies.

[2]  Jolly T. Holden,et al.  An Instructional Media Selection Guide for Distance Learning. Fourth Edition. , 2007 .

[3]  Bruce W. Tuckman,et al.  The effect of motivational scaffolding on procrastinators' distance learning outcomes , 2007, Comput. Educ..

[4]  G. Leinhardt,et al.  Going the Distance With Online Education , 2006 .

[5]  Charlie C. Chen,et al.  Online Synchronous vs. Asynchronous Software Training Through the Behavioral Modeling Approach: A Longitudinal Field Experiment , 2006, Int. J. Distance Educ. Technol..

[6]  Lynn Grinnell,et al.  Maximizing Learning from Rehearsal Activity in Web-Based Distance Learning , 2006 .

[7]  Stacy L. Williams,et al.  The Effectiveness of Distance Education in Allied Health Science Programs: A Meta-Analysis of Outcomes , 2006 .

[8]  Robert A. Wisher,et al.  THE COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS OF WEB-BASED AND CLASSROOM INSTRUCTION: , 2006 .

[9]  Otis Stanley.  A Comparison of Learning Outcomes by ‘In-Course’ Evaluation Techniques for an On-Line Course in a Controlled Environment , 2006 .

[10]  Jason Huett.  The Effects of ARCS-based Confidence Strategies on Learner Confidence and Performance in Distance Education. , 2006 .

[11]  Philip C. Abrami,et al.  Media and Pedagogy in Undergraduate Distance Education: A Theory-Based Meta-Analysis of Empirical Literature , 2006 .

[12]  Shauna Schullo,et al.  Using Synchronous Software in Web-based Nursing Courses , 2006, Computers, informatics, nursing : CIN.

[13]  Anne Nevgi,et al.  Learning outcomes in medical informatics: Comparison of a WebCT course with ordinary web site learning material , 2006, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

[14]  Barbara B. Levin,et al.  A comparative study of three instructional modalities in a computer programming course: traditional instruction, web-based instruction, and online instruction , 2006 .

[15]  Barbara Ann Schroeder,et al.  Multimedia-Enhanced Instruction in Online Learning Environments , 2006 .

[16]  Ming-Mu Kuo.  A Comparison of Traditional Videoconference-Based, and Web-Based Learning Environments. , 2005 .

[17]  James D. Klein,et al.  Small Group Learning in an Online Asynchronous Environment , 2005 .

[18]  Julia Chelagat Bore.  Distance Education in the Preparation of Special Education Personnel: An Examination of Videoconferencing and Web-based Instruction , 2005 .

[19]  Yong Zhao,et al.  What Makes the Difference? A Practical Analysis of Research on the Effectiveness of Distance Education , 2005, Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education.

[20]  Kyle Higgins,et al.  Distance Education: An Exploration of Alternative Methods and Types of Instructional Media in Teacher Education , 2005 .

[21]  Lih-Wei Lei,et al.  Evaluation of computer-assisted instruction in histology: effect of interaction on learning outcome. , 2005, Anatomical record. Part B, New anatomist.

[22]  Theo J. Bastiaens,et al.  The surplus value of an authentic learning environment , 2005, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[23]  Z. Mevarech,et al.  The effects of metacognitive instruction embedded within an asynchronous learning network on scientific inquiry skills , 2005 .

[24]  D. Benson.  Comparison of learning style and other characteristics of site-based, hybrid and online students , 2005 .

[25]  E. Anderton.  An evaluation of strategies to promote self-regulated learning in pre-service teachers in an online class , 2005 .

[26]  William Warrick.  The Learner And The Expert Mentor, Learners And A Facilitator, Peer Facilitated Learning: A Comparison Of Three Online Learning Designs , 2005 .

[27]  Peter B. Williams,et al.  On-Demand Tutoring in Distance Education: Intrinsically-motivated, Scalable Interpersonal Interaction to Improve Achievement, Completion, and Satisfaction , 2005 .

[28]  Philip C. Abrami,et al.  A methodological morass? How we can improve quantitative research in distance education , 2004 .

[29]  Robert Blomeyer,et al.  The Effects of Distance Education on K-12 Student Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis. , 2004 .

[30]  M. Allen,et al.  Evaluating the Effectiveness of Distance Learning: A Comparison Using Meta-Analysis , 2004 .

[31]  Robert M. Bernard,et al.  How Does Distance Education Compare With Classroom Instruction? A Meta-Analysis of the Empirical Literature , 2004 .

[32]  A. Wise,et al.  The Effects of Teacher Social Presence on Student Satisfaction, Engagement, and Learning , 2004, ICLS.

[33]  Ke Zhang,et al.  EFFECTS OF PEER-CONTROLLED OR EXTERNALLY STRUCTURED AND MODERATED ONLINE COLLABORATION ON GROUP PROBLEM SOLVING PROCESSES AND RELATED INDIVIDUAL ATTITUDES IN WELL- STRUCTURED AND ILL-STRUCTURED SMALL GROUP PROBLEM SOLVING IN A HYBRID COURSE , 2004 .

[34]  Larry V. Banks.  Brick, click, or brick and click: A comparative study on the effectiveness of content delivery modalities for working adults , 2004 .

[35]  Y. Suh.  Factors related to student satisfaction with Web and interactive television courses , 2004 .

[36]  Starr Roxanne Hiltz,et al.  Mediators of the effectiveness of online courses , 2003 .

[37]  Michael W. Kernodle,et al.  Qualitative Analysis of the Overhand Throw by Undergraduates in Education Using a Distance Learning Computer Program , 2003, Perceptual and motor skills.

[38]  T. Anderson.  Getting the Mix Right Again: An Updated and Theoretical Rationale for Interaction , 2003 .

[39]  Y. Neumann,et al.  Differences Between Traditional and Distance Education Academic Performances: A Meta-Analytic Approach , 2003 .

[40]  Karen H Frith,et al.  The effect of communication on nursing student outcomes in a Web-based course. , 2003, The Journal of nursing education.

[41]  Martin Kohlmeier,et al.  Adapting the contents of computer-based instruction based on knowledge tests maintains effectiveness of nutrition education. , 2003, The American journal of clinical nutrition.

[42]  Brian H. Cameron,et al.  The effectiveness of simulation in a hybrid and on-line networking course , 2003, SIGCSE.

[43]  Cs Ungerleider,et al.  A systematic review of the effectiveness and efficiency networked ICT in education: A state of the field report to the Council of Ministers of Education, Canada and Industry Canada. , 2003 .

[44]  M. Sweeney-Dillon.  Participant experience of distance education: Critical success factors , 2003 .

[45]  Leonard Anthony Annetta.  A comparative study of three distance education strategies on the learning and attitudes of elementary school teachers participating in a professional development project , 2003 .

[46]  Terry Anderson,et al.  Modes of Interaction in Distance Education: Recent Developments and Research Questions , 2003 .

[47]  Lauren Cifuentes,et al.  The Interactive Effects of Computer Conferencing and Multiple Intelligences on Expository Writing. , 2003 .

[48]  Robert A. Wisher,et al.  The Effectiveness of Web-Based Instruction , 2003 .

[49]  Gila Kurtz,et al.  Alternative Online Pedagogical Models With Identical Contents: A Comparison of Two University-Level Course , 2003 .

[50]  Gilly Salmon,et al.  E-moderating: the key to teaching and learning online , 2003 .

[51]  Charles L. Karr,et al.  Analysis of the Effectiveness of Online Learning in a Graduate Engineering Math Course , 2003 .

[52]  Youngjin Yoo,et al.  A Comparative Study of Distributed Learning Environments on Learning Outcomes , 2002, Inf. Syst. Res..

[53]  Joi L. Moore,et al.  Student Perceptions as Distance Learners in Internet-Based Courses , 2002 .

[54]  Robert A. Wisher,et al.  The Effectiveness of Web-Based Instruction: An Initial Inquiry. , 2002 .

[55]  Lawrence A. Beard,et al.  Student Perceptions of Online versus on Campus Instruction , 2002 .

[56]  Ruth Beyth-Marom,et al.  Satellite-Based Synchronous Tutorials vs. Satellite-Based Asynchronous Videocassettes: Factors Affecting Students' Attitudes and Choices , 2002 .

[57]  Can Selected Learning Strategies Influence the Success of Adult Distance Learners in Agriculture , 2002 .

[58]  M. Allen,et al.  Comparing Student Satisfaction With Distance Education to Traditional Classrooms in Higher Education: A Meta-Analysis , 2002 .

[59]  I. Jung,et al.  Effects of Different Types of Interaction on Learning Achievement, Satisfaction and Participation in Web-Based Instruction , 2002 .

[60]  Ya-Ting Carolyn Yang.  Use of structured Web -based bulletin board discussions with Socratic questioning to enhance students' critical thinking skills in distance education , 2002 .

[61]  Robert M. Bernard,et al.  Computer Conferencing: An Environment for Collaborative Project-Based Learning in Distance Education , 2001 .

[62]  Alfred P. Rovai,et al.  Classroom community at a distance: A comparative analysis of two ALN-based university programs , 2001, Internet High. Educ..

[63]  David J. Lilja,et al.  Teaching computer systems performance analysis , 2001, IEEE Trans. Educ..

[64]  R. Mayer,et al.  Multimedia Learning: The Promise of Multimedia Learning , 2001 .

[65]  L. Sutton.  The Principle of Vicarious Interaction in Computer-Mediated Communications , 2001 .

[66]  Nancy Ostiguy,et al.  Assessing Differences in Instructional Methods: Uncovering How Students Learn Best. , 2001 .

[67]  Brent Muirhead.  Interactivity Research Studies , 2001, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[68]  Cathy Cavanaugh,et al.  The effectiveness of interactive distance education technologies in K-12 learning: A meta-analysis , 2001 .

[69]  Mark W. Lipsey,et al.  Practical Meta-Analysis , 2000 .

[70]  Kelli Cargile Cook.  Online technical communication: Pedagogy, instructional design, and student satisfaction in Internet-based distance education , 2000 .

[71]  J. W. Asher,et al.  A meta‐analysis of the effectiveness of telecourses in distance education , 2000 .

[72]  Robert M. Bernard,et al.  Collaborative online distance learning: Issues for future practice and research , 2000, Distance Education.

[73]  Yaacov J. Katz.  The Comparative Suitability Of Three ICT Distance Learning Methodologies For College Level Instruction , 2000 .

[74]  A. Chickering,et al.  Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education , 1987, CORE.

[75]  Richard E. Clark,et al.  Evaluating Distance Education: Strategies and Cautions , 2000 .

[76]  Narumol Ruksasuk.  Effects of learning styles and participatory interaction modes on achievement of Thai students involved in web-based instruction in library and information science distance education , 2000 .

[77]  Michael Collins,et al.  Comparing Web, Correspondence and Lecture versions of a second-year non-major Biology course , 2000, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[78]  Brent Muirhead,et al.  Enhancing Social Interaction in Computer-Mediated Distance Education , 2000, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[79]  Rod Sims,et al.  Interactivity on stage: Strategies for learner-designer communication , 1999 .

[80]  Ronald A. Phipps,et al.  What''s the Difference? A Review of Contemporary Research on the Effectiveness of Distance Learning , 1999 .

[81]  Mikiko Ward Crawford.  Students' perceptions of the interpersonal communication courses offered through distance education at Ohio University , 1999 .

[82]  T. Anderson,et al.  Using Constructivism in Technology-Mediated Learning: Constructing Order out of the Chaos in the Literature , 1999 .

[83]  Anita L. Callahan,et al.  Distance Education Moves Into The 21st Century: A Comparison Of Delivery Methods , 1998 .

[84]  Kyle Higgins,et al.  Delivering Instruction via Interactive Television and Videotape: Student Achievement and Satisfaction , 1998 .

[85]  David R. Moore,et al.  Building Interactivity into Web Courses: Tools for Social and Instructional Interaction. , 1998 .

[86]  Mike Moore,et al.  The effects of distance learning , 1997 .

[87]  John Paul Ashenfelter.  Strategies for Introducing Faculty with Limited Computer Skills to Web-Based Instructional Projects: Case Studies in Drama and the Classics. , 1997 .

[88]  Live vs. Taped: New Perspectives in Satellite-Based Programming for Primary Grades. , 1997 .

[89]  James L. Davis.  Computer-Assisted Distance Learning, Part II: Examination Performance of Students On and Off Campus , 1996 .

[90]  Ann L. Brown,et al.  Guided discovery in a community of learners. , 1994 .

[91]  Ellen D. Wagner,et al.  In Support of a Functional Definition of Interaction , 1994 .

[92]  Michael W. Cronin.  Teaching Listening Skills via Interactive Videodisc. , 1993 .

[93]  Diana Laurillard,et al.  Rethinking University Teaching: A Framework for the Effective Use of Educational Technology , 1993 .

[94]  C. Fulford,et al.  Perceptions of Interaction: The critical predictor in distance education , 1993 .

[95]  Som Naidu,et al.  Post-questioning, concept mapping and feedback: a distance education field experiment , 1992, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[96]  P. Kirschner,et al.  Audiotape feedback for essays in distance education , 1991 .

[97]  Fons Jaspers,et al.  Interactivity or instruction?: a reaction to Merrill , 1991 .

[98]  James Daniel Lehman,et al.  Comparison of Performance and Attitude in Traditional and Computer Conferencing Classes. , 1991 .

[99]  Rebecca W. Libler.  A study of the effectiveness of interactive television as the primary mode of instruction in selected high school physics classes , 1991 .

[100]  A. W. Bates,et al.  Interactivity as a Criterion for Media Selection in Distance Education. , 1990 .

[101]  P. Juler,et al.  Promoting interaction; maintaining independence: swallowing the mixture , 1990 .

[102]  Gordon Thompson.  How Can Correspondence-Based Distance Education be Improved?: A Survey of Attitudes of Students Who Are Not Well Disposed toward Correspondence Study , 1990 .

[103]  M. B. Walker,et al.  Continuing engineering education by electronic blackboard and videotape: a comparison of on-campus and off-campus student performance , 1989 .

[104]  P. Grimes,et al.  The Effectiveness of "Economics U$A" on Learning and Attitudes. , 1989 .

[105]  Paul L. Beare.  The Comparative Effectiveness of Videotape, Audiotape, and Telelecture in Delivering Continuing Teacher Education , 1989 .

[106]  M. Moore.  Editorial: Three types of interaction , 1989 .

[107]  Terry Boucher,et al.  The effects of computer‐based marking on completion rates and student achievement for students taking a secondary‐level distance education course , 1986 .

[108]  D. Keegan.  Foundations of distance education , 1986 .

[109]  L. Hedges,et al.  Statistical Methods for Meta-Analysis , 1987 .

[110]  Ingram Olkin,et al.  Estimation of a Single Effect Size: Parametric and Nonparametric Methods , 1985 .

[111]  Mike Moore,et al.  Toward a Theory of Independent Learning and Teaching , 1973 .