Online IS Education for the 21st Century

1. INTRODUCTION Online learning has become an important way to deliver courses in higher education. According to a recent SLOAN-C annual report (Allen and Seaman, 2013), over 6.7 million students were taking at least one online course and 32% of current higher education students have taken at least one course online. Furthermore, over 69% of higher education institutions now say that online learning is a critical part of their long-term strategy (Allen and Seaman, 2013). In the area of information systems, more and more information systems (IS), information technology (IT), and Management Information Systems (MIS) (collectively referred to as IS/IT) programs in the world are offering online courses to their students. About 14 year ago only 2 online programs existed that did not have a campus attendance requirement. At that time email was the primary communication method that was supplemented with web sites, electronic bulletin boards, web boards, listservs, and chat rooms. (Reif and Kruck, 2010). A current internet search indicates that many universities (such as Washington State University and Oklahoma State University) are offering their IS/IT programs completely through online formats. These online programs offer IS/IT students the opportunity to earn degrees without having to come to the physical university campus location (Chong, et al., 2012; He and Yen, 2014). As online learning becomes more prevalent and higher educational institutions continue to expand their online programs, more and more educators and organizations have become concerned with the quality of online courses (Abdous, 2010; Rovai and Downey, 2010; Yang, 2010). In 2007, the AACSB (Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business) had recognized the growing importance of distance learning, in particular online courses and programs in business schools and had formed a task force to develop guidelines. Currently, one of the items they look closely at during their accreditation visit is if the school has adequate financial resources to provide technology support for students and faculty appropriate to its online programs (AACSB, 2013). Designing, developing, teaching, and assessing an online IS/IT course effectively is often a challenge. Many IS/IT instructors are new to online teaching and need orientation and training for their own readiness in designing, developing, teaching, and assessing IS/IT courses. It is recognized that effective faculty are key to student success in online courses and to the success of online programs (Meyer and Jones, 2012). Therefore, it is imperative that instructors and administrators in schools of information systems learn more of the best practices and issues of designing, developing, teaching, and assessing online IS courses and programs. 2. ONLINE COURSES VS. FACE-TO-FACE COURSES As more and more administrators and instructors are interested in developing and delivering online courses or programs, the awareness of the quality of online learning is getting more and more important. There are substantial concerns with the quality of online education compared with face-to-face classes (Abdous, 2010; Rovai and Downey, 2010; Yang, 2010). Jahng, Krug and Zhang (2007) conducted a meta-analysis of student achievement comparison-related research and did not find any significant difference between online courses and face-to-face courses in terms of student achievement. Larson and Sung (2009) assessed the effect of three delivery methods (i.e., face-to-face, blended, and online) on student grades in an introductory MIS course taught by the same instructor. They found that student grades were not significantly different across the three delivery modes. Carrol and Burke (2010) compared the final exam and course evaluations of two sections of an MBA course: an online section and a face-to-face section. They only found trivial differences in the final exam scores and student course evaluations. …

[1]  D. Randy Garrison,et al.  Critical Inquiry in a Text-Based Environment: Computer Conferencing in Higher Education , 1999, Internet High. Educ..

[2]  H. Reif,et al.  Toward an Understanding of Information Systems Related Disciplines and Online Degree Programs , 2000 .

[3]  Elsabé Cloete,et al.  Quality issues in system engineering affecting virtual distance learning systems , 2000, Proceedings 24th Annual International Computer Software and Applications Conference. COMPSAC2000.

[4]  Karen Swan,et al.  Measures of Learning Effectiveness in the SUNY Learning Network , 2001 .

[5]  D. Garrison,et al.  Critical thinking, cognitive presence, and computer conferencing in distance education , 2001 .

[6]  C. Tu,et al.  The Relationship of Social Presence and Interaction in Online Classes , 2002 .

[7]  Michael Coghlan,et al.  Online Collaborative Learning: Theory and Practice , 2004, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[8]  D. Garrison,et al.  Facilitating Cognitive Presence in Online Learning: Interaction Is Not Enough , 2005 .

[9]  Michael A. Herbert.  Staying the Course: A Study in Online Student Satisfaction and Retention , 2006 .

[10]  Gail Fitzgerald,et al.  An Investigation of Communicative Competence of ESL Students Using Electronic Discussion Boards , 2006 .

[11]  N. Sadat Shami,et al.  Adapting a Face-to-Face Role-Playing Simulation for Online Play , 2006 .

[12]  Amber Settle,et al.  Distance Learning and Student Satisfaction in Java Programming Courses , 2007, J. Univers. Comput. Sci..

[13]  Namsook Jahng,et al.  Student Achievement in Online Distance Education Compared to Face-to-Face Education , 2007 .

[14]  D. Garrison,et al.  Researching the community of inquiry framework: Review, issues, and future directions , 2007, Internet High. Educ..

[15]  Karen Swan,et al.  Validating a Measurement Tool of Presen ce in Online Communities of Inquiry , 2008 .

[16]  Steven M. Crooks,et al.  Examining Online Learning Patterns with Data Mining Techniques in Peer-Moderated and Teacher-Moderated Courses , 2009 .

[17]  Stefan Hrastinski,et al.  A theory of online learning as online participation , 2009, Comput. Educ..

[18]  Barbara Means,et al.  Evaluation of Evidence-Based Practices in Online Learning: A Meta-Analysis and Review of Online Learning Studies , 2009 .

[19]  B. Patterson,et al.  Attrition in Online and Campus Degree Programs. , 2009 .

[20]  Errin Heyman,et al.  Overcoming student retention issues in higher education online programs: A Delphi study. , 2010 .

[21]  Yi Yang,et al.  Roles of Administrators in Ensuring the Quality of Online Programs , 2010 .

[22]  Shane Dawson,et al.  Mining LMS data to develop an "early warning system" for educators: A proof of concept , 2010, Comput. Educ..

[23]  A. P. Rovai,et al.  Why some distance education programs fail while others succeed in a global environment , 2010, Internet High. Educ..

[24]  M'hammed Abdous.  Operationalizing Quality Assurance in E-learning: A Process-Oriented Lifecycle Model , 2010 .

[25]  Norman E. Carrol,et al.  Learning Effectiveness Using Different Teaching Modalities , 2010 .

[26]  Shenghua Zha,et al.  Effects of Peer-Led Online Asynchronous Discussion on Undergraduate Students' Cognitive Achievement , 2011 .

[27]  Luis Miguel,et al.  (THREE TYPES OF INTERACTION (3TI) IN ONLINE LEARNING OF CURRICULUM AND TEACHING CAPACITIES (CTCS) OF TEACHERS OF THE CANARY ISLANDS' EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM) , 2011 .

[28]  Mirna Nachouki,et al.  Evaluating Student Satisfaction with Blended Learning in a Gender-Segregated Environment , 2012, J. Inf. Technol. Educ. Res..

[29]  Katrina A. Meyer,et al.  Graduate Students Rate Institutional Websites: The Must Have, Nice to Have, and Delighted to Have Services , 2012 .

[30]  I. E. Allen,et al.  Changing Course: Ten Years of Tracking Online Education in the United States. , 2013 .

[31]  Wu He,et al.  Examining students' online interaction in a live video streaming environment using data mining and text mining , 2013, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[32]  Cherng-Jyh Yen,et al.  The Role of Delivery Methods on the Perceived Learning Performance and Satisfaction of IT Students in Software Programming Courses , 2014, J. Inf. Syst. Educ..