essay on e learning is better than traditional

You are using an outdated browser. Please upgrade your browser to improve your experience.

Issues We Care About

• Digital Divide
• Affordability
• College Readiness
• Environmental Barriers

Measuring Impact

• WGU's Success Metrics
• Policy Priorities
• Annual Report
• WGU's Story
• Careers at WGU
• Impact Blog

Distance Learning vs. Traditional Learning: Pros and Cons

• Online University Experience
• See More Tags

Distance learning, often called “distance education,” is the process by which students use the internet to attend classes and complete courses to earn their degrees without having to physically attend school. Even prior to COVID-19, distance learning was experiencing steady growth, but those numbers grew exponentially during the global shutdown of schools. Many educational institutions had to design and improve online education plans while bringing teachers and students up-to-speed on distance learning technologies.

In addition to pandemic-related shifts to online education, there are many reasons students may want to pursue distance education as opposed to traditional schooling. As distance learning becomes more common, it’s important to research and decide which education model is the best fit for you. 

What Is Long-Distance Learning?

Long-distance learning—also called “remote learning”—takes place in a digital classroom setting. Traditionally, academic instruction is administered on –a college or school campus. Distance learning is a distributed learning model that allows students to learn from anywhere, sometimes even on their own time.

Virtual lectures over video, emails, instant chat messages, file-sharing systems, mailed media, and prerecorded content are some of the most common means of delivery between teachers and their remote pupils.  

Distance learning shouldn’t be mistaken for online learning, sometimes called e-learning. The latter will usually involve some element of in-person instruction, supplemented by the flexibility of a virtual classroom. Distance learning, meanwhile, is completely remote—special events like graduation or final exams may warrant an in-person gathering, but students and faculty will usually be separated physically for the entirety of the semester.

What Is Traditional Learning?

Since COVID-19 and the ensuing educational overhaul, there has been much debate regarding which type of learning environment is superior. Even in-person classrooms have unquestionably been changed by the pandemic; many believe these reforms are for the better, too.

New technology, new belief systems, and a brand-new attitude regarding what makes for a valuable learning experience have all had their influence over teachers and college professors nationwide, but the most devout among them still believe strongly in what a physical classroom has to offer students, especially at the college and post-grad level. Absence, as they say, may make the heart grow fonder, which is why many educators are proud to protect a traditional experience, at least for their own learners. 

Traditional learning, in a general, pre-pandemic sense, describes the scenario of an instructor leading a classroom of students in person, moderating the discourse and regulating the flow of knowledge. While remote learners certainly existed before the recent digital revolution, a traditional experience was the norm before 2019.

Long-Distance Learning vs. Traditional Learning

To many, the most important factor to consider will be the fact that remote learners do not have immediate access to a real person teaching in front of them. Live lectures bridge this gap significantly, but, for some, this consideration alone is enough to tip the scale in a traditional classroom’s favor.

A few key differences between these education styles include:

• Where the lessons occur
• When the lessons occur
• The pace at which the lessons are administered
• The environment in which the student is immersed 
• The independence and autonomy required on the part of the student
• The firsthand sources of information received by the student
• The level of candid interaction and attention the student receives
• Sometimes, even the cost of matriculation will vary here significantly

In-person interaction and socializing with other students is considered by many to be paramount to a comprehensive, truly enriching academic experience. For this reason, many schools have adopted a blended approach, combining the best of both worlds where and when each would be most appropriate.

There are, however, many scenarios in which an in-person classroom just isn’t ideal, safe, or even possible. The pandemic is one obvious example; the majority of parents and instructors appear to prefer this approach, as opposed to simply having every student withdraw in quarantine.

Nontraditional students are another demographic who have found a lot of success through a flexible, online education. Working mothers, those pursuing advanced degrees after hours, and even young people hoping to catch up after a period of personal turmoil or illness may all be able to benefit from the freedom of a virtual learning experience.

Ultimately, the efficacy of the program depends greatly upon the student in question. Either approach can result in an educated individual, ready to graduate and take on the world.

What Are the Pros and Cons of Distance Learning?

Technical elements.

Online or distance learning often has technology involved to help you do your coursework.

There are many pros to the technological elements of distance learning. Many students are able to quickly learn new tech and excel in it, even listing their skills with learning programs and platforms on their résumé. Another huge pro of distance learning technology is that you can pursue your education from anywhere with internet access. The rise of virtual tools like Zoom, Slack, Blackboard, and Google Classroom have made it even easier for students and teachers to share information and to connect.

Sometimes, students will encounter technical difficulties with online learning. There may be days when their internet doesn’t work, when programs and software fail, or they’re unable to access their courses. This can be frustrating, though often these bugs are fixed quickly, and students are able to continue with their work.

Credibility

Every student wants to know that their work will be valuable to a potential employer. Are online colleges credible? Is online learning effective? These may be questions students ask when considering distance learning. 

More employers than ever before recognize that online learning is credible and legitimate. According to CNN, 83% of executives say that an online degree is as credible as one earned through a traditional program. The fact that more than half of all American adults believe that believe that an online education will often be just as good as an in-person experience has many long-standing institutions rethinking their stances. This number of is growing, too —those who assert that remote learning may be superior in some cases more than doubled between 2021 and 2022.

What’s important to employers is that your school is accredited. Universities work hard to achieve and maintain accreditation, which ensures that students earn degrees that are valuable to them and to employers. Additionally, employers may respect you more for having received an online education; they’ll recognize the time and discipline it takes to pursue distance learning and may be more impressed by it.  

Some employers and companies may still rank online education as lower than a degree from a traditional college. When employers don’t understand the rigor and quality of an online education, they may be hesitant to hire someone with an online degree. Additionally, for-profit or non-accredited online schools are often a huge issue for credibility. When it comes to pursuing an online degree, make sure that the online program is accredited and offers marketable credentials. Communicating these factors typically validates a program to potential employers. 

Flexibility

Flexibility is the main reason many people choose online education. But there are pros and cons involved with the flexibility of distance learning. 

If you have a full-time job or family responsibilities, then the flexibility of online education would allow you a better work-life balance. With distance learning, you don’t have to worry about commuting to and from school, coordinating childcare, or leaving work to attend class. You can continue with your job and family needs, completing your schooling when the timing is right for you. And at institutions like WGU, you can complete coursework and take exams according to your schedule. With competency-based education, you can move more quickly through material you understand well, and spend more time on material you need help with. This flexibility means that you’re in charge of your schedule.

Some distance learning options don’t offer as much flexibility as you need, requiring you to log in to class at a set time or view discussions live. While it still may be more convenient than driving to a campus, this scheduled online learning may lack the flexibility you need. WGU, on the other hand, doesn’t require you to log in at a certain time to view lectures or have discussions. But the flexibility of online learning can be difficult for those who are not self-motivated. Since you’re not expected to show up at a certain time, you need the discipline to make time for your education.

Social Interactions

Some students are concerned that distance learning will mean that they’re entirely alone, but that is rarely the case.

Online learning often offers many opportunities for students to interact with others. For example, WGU students often work with their Program Mentor over the phone or email, giving them an important lifeline to someone invested in their success. Students can also interact with Course Instructors if they have questions or concerns. Additionally, student networking allows WGU students to socialize, compare thoughts on courses, and offer help. And a large alumni network means you can continue to make connections throughout your career. 

For students who want to speak to others face-to-face or participate in in-person clubs or events, distance learning may not be the best option. While you can still be social with online education, most interactions occur over the phone or on online platforms.

Is Distance Learning Right for Me?

If you’re thinking about an online degree program , it’s important to ask yourself: 

• Do I have the self-discipline and motivation to do distance learning? 
• Do I have the time to commit to online education? Or can I find an online program that fits into my life?
• Do I feel comfortable asking for help? 

While online learning may not be for everyone, many of the questions students have about pursuing distance education can be answered. Some students will find that for them, the pros greatly outweigh the cons. If you’re ready to pursue higher education in the way that works best for you, consider l ong-distance learning and online programs at WGU.

Ready to Start Your Journey?

HEALTH & NURSING

Recommended Articles

Take a look at other articles from WGU. Our articles feature information on a wide variety of subjects, written with the help of subject matter experts and researchers who are well-versed in their industries. This allows us to provide articles with interesting, relevant, and accurate information. 

7 Jobs for Organized People

Computer Science Skills to Put on Your Resume

An Overview of Equity in Education

Nursing Careers: Where Is the Greatest Need

IgnitED Newsletter August Edition

IgnitED Newsletter July Edition

The university.

• Accessibility
• Accreditation

For Students

• Student Portal
• Alumni Services

Most Visited Links

• Business Programs
• Bachelor's Degrees
• Student Experience
• Online Degrees
• Scholarships
• Financial Aid
• Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion
• Testimonials
• Student Communities

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Student Opinion

Is Online Learning Effective?

A new report found that the heavy dependence on technology during the pandemic caused “staggering” education inequality. What was your experience?

By Natalie Proulx

During the coronavirus pandemic, many schools moved classes online. Was your school one of them? If so, what was it like to attend school online? Did you enjoy it? Did it work for you?

In “ Dependence on Tech Caused ‘Staggering’ Education Inequality, U.N. Agency Says ,” Natasha Singer writes:

In early 2020, as the coronavirus spread, schools around the world abruptly halted in-person education. To many governments and parents, moving classes online seemed the obvious stopgap solution. In the United States, school districts scrambled to secure digital devices for students. Almost overnight, videoconferencing software like Zoom became the main platform teachers used to deliver real-time instruction to students at home. Now a report from UNESCO , the United Nations’ educational and cultural organization, says that overreliance on remote learning technology during the pandemic led to “staggering” education inequality around the world. It was, according to a 655-page report that UNESCO released on Wednesday, a worldwide “ed-tech tragedy.” The report, from UNESCO’s Future of Education division, is likely to add fuel to the debate over how governments and local school districts handled pandemic restrictions, and whether it would have been better for some countries to reopen schools for in-person instruction sooner. The UNESCO researchers argued in the report that “unprecedented” dependence on technology — intended to ensure that children could continue their schooling — worsened disparities and learning loss for hundreds of millions of students around the world, including in Kenya, Brazil, Britain and the United States. The promotion of remote online learning as the primary solution for pandemic schooling also hindered public discussion of more equitable, lower-tech alternatives, such as regularly providing schoolwork packets for every student, delivering school lessons by radio or television — and reopening schools sooner for in-person classes, the researchers said. “Available evidence strongly indicates that the bright spots of the ed-tech experiences during the pandemic, while important and deserving of attention, were vastly eclipsed by failure,” the UNESCO report said. The UNESCO researchers recommended that education officials prioritize in-person instruction with teachers, not online platforms, as the primary driver of student learning. And they encouraged schools to ensure that emerging technologies like A.I. chatbots concretely benefited students before introducing them for educational use. Education and industry experts welcomed the report, saying more research on the effects of pandemic learning was needed. “The report’s conclusion — that societies must be vigilant about the ways digital tools are reshaping education — is incredibly important,” said Paul Lekas, the head of global public policy for the Software & Information Industry Association, a group whose members include Amazon, Apple and Google. “There are lots of lessons that can be learned from how digital education occurred during the pandemic and ways in which to lessen the digital divide. ” Jean-Claude Brizard, the chief executive of Digital Promise, a nonprofit education group that has received funding from Google, HP and Verizon, acknowledged that “technology is not a cure-all.” But he also said that while school systems were largely unprepared for the pandemic, online education tools helped foster “more individualized, enhanced learning experiences as schools shifted to virtual classrooms.” ​Education International, an umbrella organization for about 380 teachers’ unions and 32 million teachers worldwide, said the UNESCO report underlined the importance of in-person, face-to-face teaching. “The report tells us definitively what we already know to be true, a place called school matters,” said Haldis Holst, the group’s deputy general secretary. “Education is not transactional nor is it simply content delivery. It is relational. It is social. It is human at its core.”

Students, read the entire article and then tell us:

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and  log into  your Times account, or  subscribe  for all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber?  Log in .

Want all of The Times?  Subscribe .

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Open access
• Published: 09 January 2024

Online vs in-person learning in higher education: effects on student achievement and recommendations for leadership

• Bandar N. Alarifi 1 &
• Steve Song 2  

Humanities and Social Sciences Communications volume  11 , Article number:  86 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

12k Accesses

3 Citations

3 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Science, technology and society

This study is a comparative analysis of online distance learning and traditional in-person education at King Saud University in Saudi Arabia, with a focus on understanding how different educational modalities affect student achievement. The justification for this study lies in the rapid shift towards online learning, especially highlighted by the educational changes during the COVID-19 pandemic. By analyzing the final test scores of freshman students in five core courses over the 2020 (in-person) and 2021 (online) academic years, the research provides empirical insights into the efficacy of online versus traditional education. Initial observations suggested that students in online settings scored lower in most courses. However, after adjusting for variables like gender, class size, and admission scores using multiple linear regression, a more nuanced picture emerged. Three courses showed better performance in the 2021 online cohort, one favored the 2020 in-person group, and one was unaffected by the teaching format. The study emphasizes the crucial need for a nuanced, data-driven strategy in integrating online learning within higher education systems. It brings to light the fact that the success of educational methodologies is highly contingent on specific contextual factors. This finding advocates for educational administrators and policymakers to exercise careful and informed judgment when adopting online learning modalities. It encourages them to thoroughly evaluate how different subjects and instructional approaches might interact with online formats, considering the variable effects these might have on learning outcomes. This approach ensures that decisions about implementing online education are made with a comprehensive understanding of its diverse and context-specific impacts, aiming to optimize educational effectiveness and student success.

Similar content being viewed by others

Elementary school teachers’ perspectives about learning during the COVID-19 pandemic

Quality of a master’s degree in education in Ecuador

Co-designing inclusive excellence in higher education: Students’ and teachers’ perspectives on the ideal online learning environment using the I-TPACK model

Introduction.

The year 2020 marked an extraordinary period, characterized by the global disruption caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. Governments and institutions worldwide had to adapt to unforeseen challenges across various domains, including health, economy, and education. In response, many educational institutions quickly transitioned to distance teaching (also known as e-learning, online learning, or virtual classrooms) to ensure continued access to education for their students. However, despite this rapid and widespread shift to online learning, a comprehensive examination of its effects on student achievement in comparison to traditional in-person instruction remains largely unexplored.

In research examining student outcomes in the context of online learning, the prevailing trend is the consistent observation that online learners often achieve less favorable results when compared to their peers in traditional classroom settings (e.g., Fischer et al., 2020 ; Bettinger et al., 2017 ; Edvardsson and Oskarsson, 2008 ). However, it is important to note that a significant portion of research on online learning has primarily focused on its potential impact (Kuhfeld et al., 2020 ; Azevedo et al., 2020 ; Di Pietro et al., 2020 ) or explored various perspectives (Aucejo et al., 2020 ; Radha et al., 2020 ) concerning distance education. These studies have often omitted a comprehensive and nuanced examination of its concrete academic consequences, particularly in terms of test scores and grades.

Given the dearth of research on the academic impact of online learning, especially in light of Covid-19 in the educational arena, the present study aims to address that gap by assessing the effectiveness of distance learning compared to in-person teaching in five required freshmen-level courses at King Saud University, Saudi Arabia. To accomplish this objective, the current study compared the final exam results of 8297 freshman students who were enrolled in the five courses in person in 2020 to their 8425 first-year counterparts who has taken the same courses at the same institution in 2021 but in an online format.

The final test results of the five courses (i.e., University Skills 101, Entrepreneurship 101, Computer Skills 101, Computer Skills 101, and Fitness and Health Culture 101) were examined, accounting for potential confounding factors such as gender, class size and admission scores, which have been cited in past research to be correlated with student achievement (e.g., Meinck and Brese, 2019 ; Jepsen, 2015 ) Additionally, as the preparatory year at King Saud University is divided into five tracks—health, nursing, science, business, and humanity, the study classified students based on their respective disciplines.

Motivation for the study

The rapid expansion of distance learning in higher education, particularly highlighted during the recent COVID-19 pandemic (Volk et al., 2020 ; Bettinger et al., 2017 ), underscores the need for alternative educational approaches during crises. Such disruptions can catalyze innovation and the adoption of distance learning as a contingency plan (Christensen et al., 2015 ). King Saud University, like many institutions worldwide, faced the challenge of transitioning abruptly to online learning in response to the pandemic.

E-learning has gained prominence in higher education due to technological advancements, offering institutions a competitive edge (Valverde-Berrocoso et al., 2020 ). Especially during conditions like the COVID-19 pandemic, electronic communication was utilized across the globe as a feasible means to overcome barriers and enhance interactions (Bozkurt, 2019 ).

Distance learning, characterized by flexibility, became crucial when traditional in-person classes are hindered by unforeseen circumstance such as the ones posed by COVID-19 (Arkorful and Abaidoo, 2015 ). Scholars argue that it allows students to learn at their own pace, often referred to as self-directed learning (Hiemstra, 1994 ) or self-education (Gadamer, 2001 ). Additional advantages include accessibility, cost-effectiveness, and flexibility (Sadeghi, 2019 ).

However, distance learning is not immune to its own set of challenges. Technical impediments, encompassing network issues, device limitations, and communication hiccups, represent formidable hurdles (Sadeghi, 2019 ). Furthermore, concerns about potential distractions in the online learning environment, fueled by the ubiquity of the internet and social media, have surfaced (Hall et al., 2020 ; Ravizza et al., 2017 ). The absence of traditional face-to-face interactions among students and between students and instructors is also viewed as a potential drawback (Sadeghi, 2019 ).

Given the evolving understanding of the pros and cons of distance learning, this study aims to contribute to the existing literature by assessing the effectiveness of distance learning, specifically in terms of student achievement, as compared to in-person classroom learning at King Saud University, one of Saudi Arabia’s largest higher education institutions.

Academic achievement: in-person vs online learning

The primary driving force behind the rapid integration of technology in education has been its emphasis on student performance (Lai and Bower, 2019 ). Over the past decade, numerous studies have undertaken comparisons of student academic achievement in online and in-person settings (e.g., Bettinger et al., 2017 ; Fischer et al., 2020 ; Iglesias-Pradas et al., 2021 ). This section offers a concise review of the disparities in academic achievement between college students engaged in in-person and online learning, as identified in existing research.

A number of studies point to the superiority of traditional in-person education over online learning in terms of academic outcomes. For example, Fischer et al. ( 2020 ) conducted a comprehensive study involving 72,000 university students across 433 subjects, revealing that online students tend to achieve slightly lower academic results than their in-class counterparts. Similarly, Bettinger et al. ( 2017 ) found that students at for-profit online universities generally underperformed when compared to their in-person peers. Supporting this trend, Figlio et al. ( 2013 ) indicated that in-person instruction consistently produced better results, particularly among specific subgroups like males, lower-performing students, and Hispanic learners. Additionally, Kaupp’s ( 2012 ) research in California community colleges demonstrated that online students faced lower completion and success rates compared to their traditional in-person counterparts (Fig. 1 ).

The figure compared student achievement in the final tests in the five courses by year, using independent-samples t-tests; the results show a statistically-significant drop in test scores from 2020 (in person) to 2021 (online) for all courses except CT_101.

In contrast, other studies present evidence of online students outperforming their in-person peers. For example, Iglesias-Pradas et al. ( 2021 ) conducted a comparative analysis of 43 bachelor courses at Telecommunication Engineering College in Malaysia, revealing that online students achieved higher academic outcomes than their in-person counterparts. Similarly, during the COVID-19 pandemic, Gonzalez et al. ( 2020 ) found that students engaged in online learning performed better than those who had previously taken the same subjects in traditional in-class settings.

Expanding on this topic, several studies have reported mixed results when comparing the academic performance of online and in-person students, with various student and instructor factors emerging as influential variables. Chesser et al. ( 2020 ) noted that student traits such as conscientiousness, agreeableness, and extraversion play a substantial role in academic achievement, regardless of the learning environment—be it traditional in-person classrooms or online settings. Furthermore, Cacault et al. ( 2021 ) discovered that online students with higher academic proficiency tend to outperform those with lower academic capabilities, suggesting that differences in students’ academic abilities may impact their performance. In contrast, Bergstrand and Savage ( 2013 ) found that online classes received lower overall ratings and exhibited a less respectful learning environment when compared to in-person instruction. Nevertheless, they also observed that the teaching efficiency of both in-class and online courses varied significantly depending on the instructors’ backgrounds and approaches. These findings underscore the multifaceted nature of the online vs. in-person learning debate, highlighting the need for a nuanced understanding of the factors at play.

Theoretical framework

Constructivism is a well-established learning theory that places learners at the forefront of their educational experience, emphasizing their active role in constructing knowledge through interactions with their environment (Duffy and Jonassen, 2009 ). According to constructivist principles, learners build their understanding by assimilating new information into their existing cognitive frameworks (Vygotsky, 1978 ). This theory highlights the importance of context, active engagement, and the social nature of learning (Dewey, 1938 ). Constructivist approaches often involve hands-on activities, problem-solving tasks, and opportunities for collaborative exploration (Brooks and Brooks, 1999 ).

In the realm of education, subject-specific pedagogy emerges as a vital perspective that acknowledges the distinctive nature of different academic disciplines (Shulman, 1986 ). It suggests that teaching methods should be tailored to the specific characteristics of each subject, recognizing that subjects like mathematics, literature, or science require different approaches to facilitate effective learning (Shulman, 1987 ). Subject-specific pedagogy emphasizes that the methods of instruction should mirror the ways experts in a particular field think, reason, and engage with their subject matter (Cochran-Smith and Zeichner, 2005 ).

When applying these principles to the design of instruction for online and in-person learning environments, the significance of adapting methods becomes even more pronounced. Online learning often requires unique approaches due to its reliance on technology, asynchronous interactions, and potential for reduced social presence (Anderson, 2003 ). In-person learning, on the other hand, benefits from face-to-face interactions and immediate feedback (Allen and Seaman, 2016 ). Here, the interplay of constructivism and subject-specific pedagogy becomes evident.

Online learning. In an online environment, constructivist principles can be upheld by creating interactive online activities that promote exploration, reflection, and collaborative learning (Salmon, 2000 ). Discussion forums, virtual labs, and multimedia presentations can provide opportunities for students to actively engage with the subject matter (Harasim, 2017 ). By integrating subject-specific pedagogy, educators can design online content that mirrors the discipline’s methodologies while leveraging technology for authentic experiences (Koehler and Mishra, 2009 ). For instance, an online history course might incorporate virtual museum tours, primary source analysis, and collaborative timeline projects.

In-person learning. In a traditional brick-and-mortar classroom setting, constructivist methods can be implemented through group activities, problem-solving tasks, and in-depth discussions that encourage active participation (Jonassen et al., 2003 ). Subject-specific pedagogy complements this by shaping instructional methods to align with the inherent characteristics of the subject (Hattie, 2009). For instance, in a physics class, hands-on experiments and real-world applications can bring theoretical concepts to life (Hake, 1998 ).

In sum, the fusion of constructivism and subject-specific pedagogy offers a versatile approach to instructional design that adapts to different learning environments (Garrison, 2011 ). By incorporating the principles of both theories, educators can tailor their methods to suit the unique demands of online and in-person learning, ultimately providing students with engaging and effective learning experiences that align with the nature of the subject matter and the mode of instruction.

Course description

The Self-Development Skills Department at King Saud University (KSU) offers five mandatory freshman-level courses. These courses aim to foster advanced thinking skills and cultivate scientific research abilities in students. They do so by imparting essential skills, identifying higher-level thinking patterns, and facilitating hands-on experience in scientific research. The design of these classes is centered around aiding students’ smooth transition into university life. Brief descriptions of these courses are as follows:

University Skills 101 (CI 101) is a three-hour credit course designed to nurture essential academic, communication, and personal skills among all preparatory year students at King Saud University. The primary goal of this course is to equip students with the practical abilities they need to excel in their academic pursuits and navigate their university lives effectively. CI 101 comprises 12 sessions and is an integral part of the curriculum for all incoming freshmen, ensuring a standardized foundation for skill development.

Fitness and Health 101 (FAJB 101) is a one-hour credit course. FAJB 101 focuses on the aspects of self-development skills in terms of health and physical, and the skills related to personal health, nutrition, sports, preventive, psychological, reproductive, and first aid. This course aims to motivate students’ learning process through entertainment, sports activities, and physical exercises to maintain their health. This course is required for all incoming freshmen students at King Saud University.

Entrepreneurship 101 (ENT 101) is a one-hour- credit course. ENT 101 aims to develop students’ skills related to entrepreneurship. The course provides students with knowledge and skills to generate and transform ideas and innovations into practical commercial projects in business settings. The entrepreneurship course consists of 14 sessions and is taught only to students in the business track.

Computer Skills 101 (CT 101) is a three-hour credit course. This provides students with the basic computer skills, e.g., components, operating systems, applications, and communication backup. The course explores data visualization, introductory level of modern programming with algorithms and information security. CT 101 course is taught for all tracks except those in the human track.

Computer Skills 102 (CT 102) is a three-hour credit course. It provides IT skills to the students to utilize computers with high efficiency, develop students’ research and scientific skills, and increase capability to design basic educational software. CT 102 course focuses on operating systems such as Microsoft Office. This course is only taught for students in the human track.

Structure and activities

These courses ranged from one to three hours. A one-hour credit means that students must take an hour of the class each week during the academic semester. The same arrangement would apply to two and three credit-hour courses. The types of activities in each course are shown in Table 1 .

At King Saud University, each semester spans 15 weeks in duration. The total number of semester hours allocated to each course serves as an indicator of its significance within the broader context of the academic program, including the diverse tracks available to students. Throughout the two years under study (i.e., 2020 and 2021), course placements (fall or spring), course content, and the organizational structure remained consistent and uniform.

Participants

The study’s data comes from test scores of a cohort of 16,722 first-year college students enrolled at King Saud University in Saudi Arabia over the span of two academic years: 2020 and 2021. Among these students, 8297 were engaged in traditional, in-person learning in 2020, while 8425 had transitioned to online instruction for the same courses in 2021 due to the Covid-19 pandemic. In 2020, the student population consisted of 51.5% females and 48.5% males. However, in 2021, there was a reversal in these proportions, with female students accounting for 48.5% and male students comprising 51.5% of the total participants.

Regarding student enrollment in the five courses, Table 2 provides a detailed breakdown by average class size, admission scores, and the number of students enrolled in the courses during the two years covered by this study. While the total number of students in each course remained relatively consistent across the two years, there were noticeable fluctuations in average class sizes. Specifically, four out of the five courses experienced substantial increases in class size, with some nearly doubling in size (e.g., ENT_101 and CT_102), while one course (CT_101) showed a reduction in its average class size.

In this study, it must be noted that while some students enrolled in up to three different courses within the same academic year, none repeated the same exam in both years. Specifically, students who failed to pass their courses in 2020 were required to complete them in summer sessions and were consequently not included in this study’s dataset. To ensure clarity and precision in our analysis, the research focused exclusively on student test scores to evaluate and compare the academic effectiveness of online and traditional in-person learning methods. This approach was chosen to provide a clear, direct comparison of the educational impacts associated with each teaching format.

Descriptive analysis of the final exam scores for the two years (2020 and 2021) were conducted. Additionally, comparison of student outcomes in in-person classes in 2020 to their online platform peers in 2021 were conducted using an independent-samples t -test. Subsequently, in order to address potential disparities between the two groups arising from variables such as gender, class size, and admission scores (which serve as an indicator of students’ academic aptitude and pre-enrollment knowledge), multiple regression analyses were conducted. In these multivariate analyses, outcomes of both in-person and online cohorts were assessed within their respective tracks. By carefully considering essential aforementioned variables linked to student performance, the study aimed to ensure a comprehensive and equitable evaluation.

Study instrument

The study obtained students’ final exam scores for the years 2020 (in-person) and 2021 (online) from the school’s records office through their examination management system. In the preparatory year at King Saud University, final exams for all courses are developed by committees composed of faculty members from each department. To ensure valid comparisons, the final exam questions, crafted by departmental committees of professors, remained consistent and uniform for the two years under examination.

Table 3 provides a comprehensive assessment of the reliability of all five tests included in our analysis. These tests exhibit a strong degree of internal consistency, with Cronbach’s alpha coefficients spanning a range from 0.77 to 0.86. This robust and consistent internal consistency measurement underscores the dependable nature of these tests, affirming their reliability and suitability for the study’s objectives.

In terms of assessing test validity, content validity was ensured through a thorough review by university subject matter experts, resulting in test items that align well with the content domain and learning objectives. Additionally, criterion-related validity was established by correlating students’ admissions test scores with their final required freshman test scores in the five subject areas, showing a moderate and acceptable relationship (0.37 to 0.56) between the test scores and the external admissions test. Finally, construct validity was confirmed through reviews by experienced subject instructors, leading to improvements in test content. With guidance from university subject experts, construct validity was established, affirming the effectiveness of the final tests in assessing students’ subject knowledge at the end of their coursework.

Collectively, these validity and reliability measures affirm the soundness and integrity of the final subject tests, establishing their suitability as effective assessment tools for evaluating students’ knowledge in their five mandatory freshman courses at King Saud University.

After obtaining research approval from the Research Committee at King Saud University, the coordinators of the five courses (CI_101, ENT_101, CT_101, CT_102, and FAJB_101) supplied the researchers with the final exam scores of all first-year preparatory year students at King Saud University for the initial semester of the academic years 2020 and 2021. The sample encompassed all students who had completed these five courses during both years, resulting in a total of 16,722 students forming the final group of participants.

Limitations

Several limitations warrant acknowledgment in this study. First, the research was conducted within a well-resourced major public university. As such, the experiences with online classes at other types of institutions (e.g., community colleges, private institutions) may vary significantly. Additionally, the limited data pertaining to in-class teaching practices and the diversity of learning activities across different courses represents a gap that could have provided valuable insights for a more thorough interpretation and explanation of the study’s findings.

To compare student achievement in the final tests in the five courses by year, independent-samples t -tests were conducted. Table 4 shows a statistically-significant drop in test scores from 2020 (in person) to 2021 (online) for all courses except CT_101. The biggest decline was with CT_102 with 3.58 points, and the smallest decline was with CI_101 with 0.18 points.

However, such simple comparison of means between the two years (via t -tests) by subjects does not account for the differences in gender composition, class size, and admission scores between the two academic years, all of which have been associated with student outcomes (e.g., Ho and Kelman, 2014 ; De Paola et al., 2013 ). To account for such potential confounding variables, multiple regressions were conducted to compare the 2 years’ results while controlling for these three factors associated with student achievement.

Table 5 presents the regression results, illustrating the variation in final exam scores between 2020 and 2021, while controlling for gender, class size, and admission scores. Importantly, these results diverge significantly from the outcomes obtained through independent-sample t -test analyses.

Taking into consideration the variables mentioned earlier, students in the 2021 online cohort demonstrated superior performance compared to their 2020 in-person counterparts in CI_101, FAJB_101, and CT_101, with score advantages of 0.89, 0.56, and 5.28 points, respectively. Conversely, in the case of ENT_101, online students in 2021 scored 0.69 points lower than their 2020 in-person counterparts. With CT_102, there were no statistically significant differences in final exam scores between the two cohorts of students.

The study sought to assess the effectiveness of distance learning compared to in-person learning in the higher education setting in Saudi Arabia. We analyzed the final exam scores of 16,722 first-year college students in King Saud University in five required subjects (i.e., CI_101, ENT_101, CT_101, CT_102, and FAJB_101). The study initially performed a simple comparison of mean scores by tracks by year (via t -tests) and then a number of multiple regression analyses which controlled for class size, gender composition, and admission scores.

Overall, the study’s more in-depth findings using multiple regression painted a wholly different picture than the results obtained using t -tests. After controlling for class size, gender composition, and admissions scores, online students in 2021 performed better than their in-person instruction peers in 2020 in University Skills (CI_101), Fitness and Health (FAJB_101), and Computer Skills (CT_101), whereas in-person students outperformed their online peers in Entrepreneurship (ENT_101). There was no meaningful difference in outcomes for students in the Computer Skills (CT_102) course for the two years.

In light of these findings, it raises the question: why do we observe minimal differences (less than a one-point gain or loss) in student outcomes in courses like University Skills, Fitness and Health, Entrepreneurship, and Advanced Computer Skills based on the mode of instruction? Is it possible that when subjects are primarily at a basic or introductory level, as is the case with these courses, the mode of instruction may have a limited impact as long as the concepts are effectively communicated in a manner familiar and accessible to students?

In today’s digital age, one could argue that students in more developed countries, such as Saudi Arabia, generally possess the skills and capabilities to effectively engage with materials presented in both in-person and online formats. However, there is a notable exception in the Basic Computer Skills course, where the online cohort outperformed their in-person counterparts by more than 5 points. Insights from interviews with the instructors of this course suggest that this result may be attributed to the course’s basic and conceptual nature, coupled with the availability of instructional videos that students could revisit at their own pace.

Given that students enter this course with varying levels of computer skills, self-paced learning may have allowed them to cover course materials at their preferred speed, concentrating on less familiar topics while swiftly progressing through concepts they already understood. The advantages of such self-paced learning have been documented by scholars like Tullis and Benjamin ( 2011 ), who found that self-paced learners often outperform those who spend the same amount of time studying identical materials. This approach allows learners to allocate their time more effectively according to their individual learning pace, providing greater ownership and control over their learning experience. As such, in courses like introductory computer skills, it can be argued that becoming familiar with fundamental and conceptual topics may not require extensive in-class collaboration. Instead, it may be more about exposure to and digestion of materials in a format and at a pace tailored to students with diverse backgrounds, knowledge levels, and skill sets.

Further investigation is needed to more fully understand why some classes benefitted from online instruction while others did not, and vice versa. Perhaps, it could be posited that some content areas are more conducive to in-person (or online) format while others are not. Or it could be that the different results of the two modes of learning were driven by students of varying academic abilities and engagement, with low-achieving students being more vulnerable to the limitations of online learning (e.g., Kofoed et al., 2021 ). Whatever the reasons, the results of the current study can be enlightened by a more in-depth analysis of the various factors associated with such different forms of learning. Moreover, although not clear cut, what the current study does provide is additional evidence against any dire consequences to student learning (at least in the higher ed setting) as a result of sudden increase in online learning with possible benefits of its wider use being showcased.

Based on the findings of this study, we recommend that educational leaders adopt a measured approach to online learning—a stance that neither fully embraces nor outright denounces it. The impact on students’ experiences and engagement appears to vary depending on the subjects and methods of instruction, sometimes hindering, other times promoting effective learning, while some classes remain relatively unaffected.

Rather than taking a one-size-fits-all approach, educational leaders should be open to exploring the nuances behind these outcomes. This involves examining why certain courses thrived with online delivery, while others either experienced a decline in student achievement or remained largely unaffected. By exploring these differentiated outcomes associated with diverse instructional formats, leaders in higher education institutions and beyond can make informed decisions about resource allocation. For instance, resources could be channeled towards in-person learning for courses that benefit from it, while simultaneously expanding online access for courses that have demonstrated improved outcomes through its virtual format. This strategic approach not only optimizes resource allocation but could also open up additional revenue streams for the institution.

Considering the enduring presence of online learning, both before the pandemic and its accelerated adoption due to Covid-19, there is an increasing need for institutions of learning and scholars in higher education, as well as other fields, to prioritize the study of its effects and optimal utilization. This study, which compares student outcomes between two cohorts exposed to in-person and online instruction (before and during Covid-19) at the largest university in Saudi Arabia, represents a meaningful step in this direction.

Data availability

The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Allen IE, Seaman J (2016) Online report card: Tracking online education in the United States . Babson Survey Group

Anderson T (2003) Getting the mix right again: an updated and theoretical rationale for interaction. Int Rev Res Open Distrib Learn , 4 (2). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v4i2.149

Arkorful V, Abaidoo N (2015) The role of e-learning, advantages and disadvantages of its adoption in higher education. Int J Instruct Technol Distance Learn 12(1):29–42

Google Scholar  

Aucejo EM, French J, Araya MP, Zafar B (2020) The impact of COVID-19 on student experiences and expectations: Evidence from a survey. Journal of Public Economics 191:104271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2020.104271

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Azevedo JP, Hasan A, Goldemberg D, Iqbal SA, and Geven K (2020) Simulating the potential impacts of COVID-19 school closures on schooling and learning outcomes: a set of global estimates. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper

Bergstrand K, Savage SV (2013) The chalkboard versus the avatar: Comparing the effectiveness of online and in-class courses. Teach Sociol 41(3):294–306. https://doi.org/10.1177/0092055X13479949

Article   Google Scholar  

Bettinger EP, Fox L, Loeb S, Taylor ES (2017) Virtual classrooms: How online college courses affect student success. Am Econ Rev 107(9):2855–2875. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20151193

Bozkurt A (2019) From distance education to open and distance learning: a holistic evaluation of history, definitions, and theories. Handbook of research on learning in the age of transhumanism , 252–273. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-8431-5.ch016

Brooks JG, Brooks MG (1999) In search of understanding: the case for constructivist classrooms . Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development

Cacault MP, Hildebrand C, Laurent-Lucchetti J, Pellizzari M (2021) Distance learning in higher education: evidence from a randomized experiment. J Eur Econ Assoc 19(4):2322–2372. https://doi.org/10.1093/jeea/jvaa060

Chesser S, Murrah W, Forbes SA (2020) Impact of personality on choice of instructional delivery and students’ performance. Am Distance Educ 34(3):211–223. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2019.1705116

Christensen CM, Raynor M, McDonald R (2015) What is disruptive innovation? Harv Bus Rev 93(12):44–53

Cochran-Smith M, Zeichner KM (2005) Studying teacher education: the report of the AERA panel on research and teacher education. Choice Rev Online 43 (4). https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.43-2338

De Paola M, Ponzo M, Scoppa V (2013) Class size effects on student achievement: heterogeneity across abilities and fields. Educ Econ 21(2):135–153. https://doi.org/10.1080/09645292.2010.511811

Dewey, J (1938) Experience and education . Simon & Schuster

Di Pietro G, Biagi F, Costa P, Karpinski Z, Mazza J (2020) The likely impact of COVID-19 on education: reflections based on the existing literature and recent international datasets. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg

Duffy TM, Jonassen DH (2009) Constructivism and the technology of instruction: a conversation . Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group

Edvardsson IR, Oskarsson GK (2008) Distance education and academic achievement in business administration: the case of the University of Akureyri. Int Rev Res Open Distrib Learn, 9 (3). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v9i3.542

Figlio D, Rush M, Yin L (2013) Is it live or is it internet? Experimental estimates of the effects of online instruction on student learning. J Labor Econ 31(4):763–784. https://doi.org/10.3386/w16089

Fischer C, Xu D, Rodriguez F, Denaro K, Warschauer M (2020) Effects of course modality in summer session: enrollment patterns and student performance in face-to-face and online classes. Internet Higher Educ 45:100710. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2019.100710

Gadamer HG (2001) Education is self‐education. J Philos Educ 35(4):529–538

Garrison DR (2011) E-learning in the 21st century: a framework for research and practice . Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203838761

Gonzalez T, de la Rubia MA, Hincz KP, Comas-Lopez M, Subirats L, Fort S, & Sacha GM (2020) Influence of COVID-19 confinement on students’ performance in higher education. PLOS One 15 (10). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0239490

Hake RR (1998) Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: a six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. Am J Phys 66(1):64–74. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.18809

Article   ADS   Google Scholar  

Hall ACG, Lineweaver TT, Hogan EE, O’Brien SW (2020) On or off task: the negative influence of laptops on neighboring students’ learning depends on how they are used. Comput Educ 153:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103901

Harasim L (2017) Learning theory and online technologies. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203846933

Hiemstra R (1994) Self-directed learning. In WJ Rothwell & KJ Sensenig (Eds), The sourcebook for self-directed learning (pp 9–20). HRD Press

Ho DE, Kelman MG (2014) Does class size affect the gender gap? A natural experiment in law. J Legal Stud 43(2):291–321

Iglesias-Pradas S, Hernández-García Á, Chaparro-Peláez J, Prieto JL (2021) Emergency remote teaching and students’ academic performance in higher education during the COVID-19 pandemic: a case study. Comput Hum Behav 119:106713. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.106713

Jepsen C (2015) Class size: does it matter for student achievement? IZA World of Labor . https://doi.org/10.15185/izawol.190

Jonassen DH, Howland J, Moore J, & Marra RM (2003) Learning to solve problems with technology: a constructivist perspective (2nd ed). Columbus: Prentice Hall

Kaupp R (2012) Online penalty: the impact of online instruction on the Latino-White achievement gap. J Appli Res Community Coll 19(2):3–11. https://doi.org/10.46569/10211.3/99362

Koehler MJ, Mishra P (2009) What is technological pedagogical content knowledge? Contemp Issues Technol Teacher Educ 9(1):60–70

Kofoed M, Gebhart L, Gilmore D, & Moschitto R (2021) Zooming to class?: Experimental evidence on college students’ online learning during COVID-19. SSRN Electron J. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3846700

Kuhfeld M, Soland J, Tarasawa B, Johnson A, Ruzek E, Liu J (2020) Projecting the potential impact of COVID-19 school closures on academic achievement. Educ Res 49(8):549–565. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189x20965918

Lai JW, Bower M (2019) How is the use of technology in education evaluated? A systematic review. Comput Educ 133:27–42

Meinck S, Brese F (2019) Trends in gender gaps: using 20 years of evidence from TIMSS. Large-Scale Assess Educ 7 (1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40536-019-0076-3

Radha R, Mahalakshmi K, Kumar VS, Saravanakumar AR (2020) E-Learning during lockdown of COVID-19 pandemic: a global perspective. Int J Control Autom 13(4):1088–1099

Ravizza SM, Uitvlugt MG, Fenn KM (2017) Logged in and zoned out: How laptop Internet use relates to classroom learning. Psychol Sci 28(2):171–180. https://doi.org/10.1177/095679761667731

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Sadeghi M (2019) A shift from classroom to distance learning: advantages and limitations. Int J Res Engl Educ 4(1):80–88

Salmon G (2000) E-moderating: the key to teaching and learning online . Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203816684

Shulman LS (1986) Those who understand: knowledge growth in teaching. Edu Res 15(2):4–14

Shulman LS (1987) Knowledge and teaching: foundations of the new reform. Harv Educ Rev 57(1):1–22

Tullis JG, Benjamin AS (2011) On the effectiveness of self-paced learning. J Mem Lang 64(2):109–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2010.11.002

Valverde-Berrocoso J, Garrido-Arroyo MDC, Burgos-Videla C, Morales-Cevallos MB (2020) Trends in educational research about e-learning: a systematic literature review (2009–2018). Sustainability 12(12):5153

Volk F, Floyd CG, Shaler L, Ferguson L, Gavulic AM (2020) Active duty military learners and distance education: factors of persistence and attrition. Am J Distance Educ 34(3):1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2019.1708842

Vygotsky LS (1978) Mind in society: the development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Sports and Recreation Management, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

Bandar N. Alarifi

Division of Research and Doctoral Studies, Concordia University Chicago, 7400 Augusta Street, River Forest, IL, 60305, USA

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Dr. Bandar Alarifi collected and organized data for the five courses and wrote the manuscript. Dr. Steve Song analyzed and interpreted the data regarding student achievement and revised the manuscript. These authors jointly supervised this work and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bandar N. Alarifi .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The author declares no competing interests.

Ethical approval

This study was approved by the Research Ethics Committee at King Saud University on 25 March 2021 (No. 4/4/255639). This research does not involve the collection or analysis of data that could be used to identify participants (including email addresses or other contact details). All information is anonymized and the submission does not include images that may identify the person. The procedures used in this study adhere to the tenets of the Declaration of Helsinki.

Informed consent

This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

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

Supplementary information

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 license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license 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 license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Alarifi, B.N., Song, S. Online vs in-person learning in higher education: effects on student achievement and recommendations for leadership. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 11 , 86 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-02590-1

Download citation

Received : 07 June 2023

Accepted : 21 December 2023

Published : 09 January 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-02590-1

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

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

A Comparison of Student Learning Outcomes: Online Education vs. Traditional Classroom Instruction

Despite the prevalence of online learning today, it is often viewed as a less favorable option when compared to the traditional, in-person educational experience. Criticisms of online learning come from various sectors, like employer groups, college faculty, and the general public, and generally includes a lack of perceived quality as well as rigor. Additionally, some students report feelings of social isolation in online learning (Protopsaltis & Baum, 2019).

In my experience as an online student as well as an online educator, online learning has been just the opposite. I have been teaching in a fully online master’s degree program for the last three years and have found it to be a rich and rewarding experience for students and faculty alike. As an instructor, I have felt more connected to and engaged with my online students when compared to in-person students. I have also found that students are actively engaged with course content and demonstrate evidence of higher-order thinking through their work. Students report high levels of satisfaction with their experiences in online learning as well as the program overall as indicated in their Student Evaluations of Teaching  (SET) at the end of every course. I believe that intelligent course design, in addition to my engagement in professional development related to teaching and learning online, has greatly influenced my experience.

In an article by Wiley Education Services, authors identified the top six challenges facing US institutions of higher education, and include:

• Declining student enrollment
• Financial difficulties
• Fewer high school graduates
• Decreased state funding
• Lower world rankings
• Declining international student enrollments

Of the strategies that institutions are exploring to remedy these issues, online learning is reported to be a key focus for many universities (“Top Challenges Facing US Higher Education”, n.d.).

Babson Survey Research Group, 2016, [PDF file].

Some of the questions I would like to explore in further research include:

• What factors influence engagement and connection in distance education?
• Are the learning outcomes in online education any different than the outcomes achieved in a traditional classroom setting?
• How do course design and instructor training influence these factors?
• In what ways might educational technology tools enhance the overall experience for students and instructors alike?

In this literature review, I have chosen to focus on a comparison of student learning outcomes in online education versus the traditional classroom setting. My hope is that this research will unlock the answers to some of the additional questions posed above and provide additional direction for future research.

Online Learning Defined

According to Mayadas, Miller, and Sener (2015), online courses are defined by all course activity taking place online with no required in-person sessions or on-campus activity. It is important to note, however, that the Babson Survey Research Group, a prominent organization known for their surveys and research in online learning, defines online learning as a course in which 80-100% occurs online. While this distinction was made in an effort to provide consistency in surveys year over year, most institutions continue to define online learning as learning that occurs 100% online.

Blended or hybrid learning is defined by courses that mix face to face meetings, sessions, or activities with online work. The ratio of online to classroom activity is often determined by the label in which the course is given. For example, a blended classroom course would likely include more time spent in the classroom, with the remaining work occurring outside of the classroom with the assistance of technology. On the other hand, a blended online course would contain a greater percentage of work done online, with some required in-person sessions or meetings (Mayadas, Miller, & Sener, 2015).

A classroom course (also referred to as a traditional course) refers to course activity that is anchored to a regular meeting time.

Enrollment Trends in Online Education

There has been an upward trend in the number of postsecondary students enrolled in online courses in the U.S. since 2002. A report by the Babson Survey Research Group showed that in 2016, more than six million students were enrolled in at least one online course. This number accounted for 31.6% of all college students (Seaman, Allen, & Seaman, 2018). Approximately one in three students are enrolled in online courses with no in-person component. Of these students, 47% take classes in a fully online program. The remaining 53% take some, but not all courses online (Protopsaltis & Baum, 2019).

(Seaman et al., 2016, p. 11)

Perceptions of Online Education

In a 2016 report by the Babson Survey Research Group, surveys of faculty between 2002-2015 showed approval ratings regarding the value and legitimacy of online education ranged from 28-34 percent. While numbers have increased and decreased over the thirteen-year time frame, faculty approval was at 29 percent in 2015, just 1 percent higher than the approval ratings noted in 2002 – indicating that perceptions have remained relatively unchanged over the years (Allen, Seaman, Poulin, & Straut, 2016).

(Allen, I.E., Seaman, J., Poulin, R., Taylor Strout, T., 2016, p. 26)

In a separate survey of chief academic officers, perceptions of online learning appeared to align with that of faculty. In this survey, leaders were asked to rate their perceived quality of learning outcomes in online learning when compared to traditional in-person settings. While the percentage of leaders rating online learning as “inferior” or “somewhat inferior” to traditional face-to-face courses dropped from 43 percent to 23 percent between 2003 to 2012, the number rose again to 29 percent in 2015 (Allen, Seaman, Poulin, & Straut, 2016).

Faculty and academic leaders in higher education are not alone when it comes to perceptions of inferiority when compared to traditional classroom instruction. A 2013 Gallop poll assessing public perceptions showed that respondents rated online education as “worse” in five of the seven categories seen in the table below.

(Saad, L., Busteed, B., and Ogisi, M., 2013, October 15)

In general, Americans believed that online education provides both lower quality and less individualized instruction and less rigorous testing and grading when compared to the traditional classroom setting. In addition, respondents also thought that employers would perceive a degree from an online program less positively when compared to a degree obtained through traditional classroom instruction (Saad, Busteed, & Ogisi, 2013).

Student Perceptions of Online Learning

So what do students have to say about online learning? In  Online College Students 2015: Comprehensive Data on Demands and Preferences,  1500 college students who were either enrolled or planning to enroll in a fully online undergraduate, graduate, or certificate program were surveyed. 78 percent of students believed the academic quality of their online learning experience to be better than or equal to their experiences with traditional classroom learning. Furthermore, 30 percent of online students polled said that they would likely not attend classes face to face if their program were not available online (Clienfelter & Aslanian, 2015). The following video describes some of the common reasons why students choose to attend college online.

How Online Learning Affects the Lives of Students ( Pearson North America, 2018, June 25)

In a 2015 study comparing student perceptions of online learning with face to face learning, researchers found that the majority of students surveyed expressed a preference for traditional face to face classes. A content analysis of the findings, however, brought attention to two key ideas: 1) student opinions of online learning may be based on “old typology of distance education” (Tichavsky, et al, 2015, p.6) as opposed to actual experience, and 2) a student’s inclination to choose one form over another is connected to issues of teaching presence and self-regulated learning (Tichavsky et al, 2015).

Student Learning Outcomes

Given the upward trend in student enrollment in online courses in postsecondary schools and the steady ratings of the low perceived value of online learning by stakeholder groups, it should be no surprise that there is a large body of literature comparing student learning outcomes in online classes to the traditional classroom environment.

While a majority of the studies reviewed found no significant difference in learning outcomes when comparing online to traditional courses (Cavanaugh & Jacquemin, 2015; Kemp & Grieve, 2014; Lyke & Frank 2012; Nichols, Shaffer, & Shockey, 2003; Stack, 2015; Summers, Waigandt, & Whittaker, 2005), there were a few outliers. In a 2019 report by Protopsaltis & Baum, authors confirmed that while learning is often found to be similar between the two mediums, students “with weak academic preparation and those from low-income and underrepresented backgrounds consistently underperform in fully-online environments” (Protopsaltis & Baum, 2019, n.p.). An important consideration, however, is that these findings are primarily based on students enrolled in online courses at the community college level – a demographic with a historically high rate of attrition compared to students attending four-year institutions (Ashby, Sadera, & McNary, 2011). Furthermore, students enrolled in online courses have been shown to have a 10 – 20 percent increase in attrition over their peers who are enrolled in traditional classroom instruction (Angelino, Williams, & Natvig, 2007). Therefore, attrition may be a key contributor to the lack of achievement seen in this subgroup of students enrolled in online education.

In contrast, there were a small number of studies that showed that online students tend to outperform those enrolled in traditional classroom instruction. One study, in particular, found a significant difference in test scores for students enrolled in an online, undergraduate business course. The confounding variable, in this case, was age. Researchers found a significant difference in performance in nontraditional age students over their traditional age counterparts. Authors concluded that older students may elect to take online classes for practical reasons related to outside work schedules, and this may, in turn, contribute to the learning that occurs overall (Slover & Mandernach, 2018).

In a meta-analysis and review of online learning spanning the years 1996 to 2008, authors from the US Department of Education found that students who took all or part of their classes online showed better learning outcomes than those students who took the same courses face-to-face. In these cases, it is important to note that there were many differences noted in the online and face-to-face versions, including the amount of time students spent engaged with course content. The authors concluded that the differences in learning outcomes may be attributed to learning design as opposed to the specific mode of delivery (Means, Toyoma, Murphy, Bakia, Jones, 2009).

Limitations and Opportunities

After examining the research comparing student learning outcomes in online education with the traditional classroom setting, there are many limitations that came to light, creating areas of opportunity for additional research. In many of the studies referenced, it is difficult to determine the pedagogical practices used in course design and delivery. Research shows the importance of student-student and student-teacher interaction in online learning, and the positive impact of these variables on student learning (Bernard, Borokhovski, Schmid, Tamim, & Abrami, 2014). Some researchers note that while many studies comparing online and traditional classroom learning exist, the methodologies and design issues make it challenging to explain the results conclusively (Mollenkopf, Vu, Crow, & Black, 2017). For example, some online courses may be structured in a variety of ways, i.e. self-paced, instructor-led and may be classified as synchronous or asynchronous (Moore, Dickson-Deane, Galyan, 2011)

Another gap in the literature is the failure to use a common language across studies to define the learning environment. This issue is explored extensively in a 2011 study by Moore, Dickson-Deane, and Galyan. Here, the authors examine the differences between e-learning, online learning, and distance learning in the literature, and how the terminology is often used interchangeably despite the variances in characteristics that define each. The authors also discuss the variability in the terms “course” versus “program”. This variability in the literature presents a challenge when attempting to compare one study of online learning to another (Moore, Dickson-Deane, & Galyan, 2011).

Finally, much of the literature in higher education focuses on undergraduate-level classes within the United States. Little research is available on outcomes in graduate-level classes as well as general information on student learning outcomes and perceptions of online learning outside of the U.S.

As we look to the future, there are additional questions to explore in the area of online learning. Overall, this research led to questions related to learning design when comparing the two modalities in higher education. Further research is needed to investigate the instructional strategies used to enhance student learning, especially in students with weaker academic preparation or from underrepresented backgrounds. Given the integral role that online learning is expected to play in the future of higher education in the United States, it may be even more critical to move beyond comparisons of online versus face to face. Instead, choosing to focus on sound pedagogical quality with consideration for the mode of delivery as a means for promoting positive learning outcomes.

Allen, I.E., Seaman, J., Poulin, R., & Straut, T. (2016). Online Report Card: Tracking Online Education in the United States [PDF file]. Babson Survey Research Group.   http://onlinelearningsurvey.com/reports/onlinereportcard.pdf

Angelino, L. M., Williams, F. K., & Natvig, D. (2007). Strategies to engage online students and reduce attrition rates.  The Journal of Educators Online , 4(2).

Ashby, J., Sadera, W.A., & McNary, S.W. (2011). Comparing student success between developmental math courses offered online, blended, and face-to-face.  Journal of Interactive Online Learning , 10(3), 128-140.

Bernard, R.M., Borokhovski, E., Schmid, R.F., Tamim, R.M., & Abrami, P.C. (2014). A meta-analysis of blended learning and technology use in higher education: From the general to the applied.  Journal of Computing in Higher Education , 26(1), 87-122.

Cavanaugh, J.K. & Jacquemin, S.J. (2015). A large sample comparison of grade based student learning outcomes in online vs. face-fo-face courses.  Journal of Asynchronous Learning Network,  19(2).

Clinefelter, D. L., & Aslanian, C. B. (2015). Online college students 2015: Comprehensive data on demands and preferences.   https://www.learninghouse.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/OnlineCollegeStudents2015.pdf

Golubovskaya, E.A., Tikhonova, E.V., & Mekeko, N.M. (2019). Measuring learning outcome and students’ satisfaction in ELT (e-learning against conventional learning). Paper presented the ACM International Conference Proceeding Series, 34-38. Doi: 10.1145/3337682.3337704

Kemp, N. & Grieve, R. (2014). Face-to-face or face-to-screen? Undergraduates’ opinions and test performance in classroom vs. online learning.  Frontiers in Psychology , 5. Doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01278

Lyke, J., & Frank, M. (2012). Comparison of student learning outcomes in online and traditional classroom environments in a psychology course. (Cover story).  Journal of Instructional Psychology , 39(3/4), 245-250.

Mayadas, F., Miller, G. & Senner, J.  Definitions of E-Learning Courses and Programs Version 2.0.  Online Learning Consortium.  https://onlinelearningconsortium.org/updated-e-learning-definitions-2/

Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M., & Jones, K. (2010). Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning: A meta-analysis and review of online learning studies. US Department of Education.  https://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/tech/evidence-based-practices/finalreport.pdf

Mollenkopf, D., Vu, P., Crow, S, & Black, C. (2017). Does online learning deliver? A comparison of student teacher outcomes from candidates in face to face and online program pathways.  Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration.  20(1).

Moore, J.L., Dickson-Deane, C., & Galyan, K. (2011). E-Learning, online learning, and distance learning environments: Are they the same?  The Internet and Higher Education . 14(2), 129-135.

Nichols, J., Shaffer, B., & Shockey, K. (2003). Changing the face of instruction: Is online or in-class more effective?   College & Research Libraries , 64(5), 378–388.  https://doi-org.proxy2.library.illinois.edu/10.5860/crl.64.5.378

Parsons-Pollard, N., Lacks, T.R., & Grant, P.H. (2008). A comparative assessment of student learning outcomes in large online and traditional campus based introduction to criminal justice courses.  Criminal Justice Studies , 2, 225-239.

Pearson North America. (2018, June 25).  How Online Learning Affects the Lives of Students . YouTube.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mPDMagf_oAE

Protopsaltis, S., & Baum, S. (2019). Does online education live up to its promise? A look at the evidence and implications for federal policy [PDF file].   http://mason.gmu.edu/~sprotops/OnlineEd.pdf

Saad, L., Busteed, B., & Ogisi, M. (October 15, 2013). In U.S., Online Education Rated Best for Value and Options.  https://news.gallup.com/poll/165425/online-education-rated-best-value-options.aspx

Stack, S. (2015). Learning Outcomes in an Online vs Traditional Course.  International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning , 9(1).

Seaman, J.E., Allen, I.E., & Seaman, J. (2018). Grade Increase: Tracking Distance Education in the United States [PDF file]. Babson Survey Research Group.  http://onlinelearningsurvey.com/reports/gradeincrease.pdf

Slover, E. & Mandernach, J. (2018). Beyond Online versus Face-to-Face Comparisons: The Interaction of Student Age and Mode of Instruction on Academic Achievement.  Journal of Educators Online,  15(1) .  https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1168945.pdf

Summers, J., Waigandt, A., & Whittaker, T. (2005). A Comparison of Student Achievement and Satisfaction in an Online Versus a Traditional Face-to-Face Statistics Class.  Innovative Higher Education , 29(3), 233–250.  https://doi-org.proxy2.library.illinois.edu/10.1007/s10755-005-1938-x

Tichavsky, L.P., Hunt, A., Driscoll, A., & Jicha, K. (2015). “It’s just nice having a real teacher”: Student perceptions of online versus face-to-face instruction.  International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning.  9(2).

Wiley Education Services. (n.d.).  Top challenges facing U.S. higher education.  https://edservices.wiley.com/top-higher-education-challenges/

July 17, 2020

Online Learning

college , distance education , distance learning , face to face , higher education , online learning , postsecondary , traditional learning , university , virtual learning

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

© 2024 — Powered by WordPress

Theme by Anders Noren — Up ↑

Blogs – Digital Class

E-learning Vs Traditional Learning: Which one is better?

E-learning Vs Traditional Learning: Mostly, we hear the word eLearning nowadays. The word eLearning also known as electronic learning means learning with a Digital Platform that is without going anywhere.

E-Learning often referred to as “Distance Learning” or “Online Learning” which involves the umbrella term for any learning that takes place across distance and not in a traditional classroom.

Online learning is a Digital Education. Science has invented many gadgets for eLearning such as smartphones, tablets, laptops etc. through which one can study subjects of one’s choice. The number of students can be taught together sitting in one place. The world is transforming from traditional education to Digital education.

Both students and teachers get flexibility in online learning. It is easy to get an education digitally as it gives the opportunity to learn from the best teachers of a particular subject.

Table of Contents

Is online study more effective than traditional debate?

Many of us are usually familiar with traditional teaching and learning where the teacher is teaching 30 to 40 students at a time and no one knows what students are getting or not what is explained. so this type of study is not considered more effective than online study.

This is the most powerful thing of learning recently because the world is changing towards digitalization. Sometimes people debate about E Learning vs Traditional Learning and E Learning vs Traditional Learning Group Discussion, and after that, they start believing in Digital Platform.

Debate on Digital education should be considered because it is time for changing our educational method. Do you know about Classroom Learning?

Classroom Learning is a traditional way of learning in which students come to class and teachers teach them at a time. All the students present in the class understand the same thing which is prepared for them by their teachers.

Everyone has different abilities in learning and different capabilities of understanding.

What is Traditional Learning?

Earlier, our traditional teaching in Gurukuls (Ashrams) was famous in India. Similar kinds of systems have also prevailed in other countries.

Traditional Classroom learning has been adopted since ancient times in which students are taught similar things by their teachers by the same methods.

All must be present if they want to get an education. If a student does not attend any lecture, he/she may miss the topic taught by the teacher in that lecture.

Teachers can teach a certain number of students in a classroom. All the students must learn the same thing whether it is fruitful or not. Some are not interested in a particular topic, but they have to study.

In this way, the traditional system of education is a classroom learning pattern. The debate about What is Better Traditional or Online Education continues, but it’s clear that digitalization is the future.

What is Online Learning?

The online Learning method is any shape of education that takes place over the Internet. In recent times, students attend online classes, study online courses, or get involved in real-time interactions with teachers and students, also it has various digital tools.

Now, The Best thing is online learning is that individuals can take a course from the comfort of their office or home. It climbs over national boundaries. They offered to dispersed college students giving them the option to choose an online program of their preference.

Therefore, these courses often offer alternatives to live query resolution like online forums, emails, and chatrooms because using these alternatives can be helpful for individuals to get their queries answered. Also, students can view learning material at their leisure. Even students attend scheduled conferences or lectures.

Even if, this helps by reducing the number of books one has to read, there may be too many sources of information one has to read and choose the relevant ones, which can result in information overload.

Thus online learning may be more suitable for grownups who are continuing their education while they’re fixing their careers.

Why is online learning more effective?

Online learning is more effective than traditional learning because it gives you time freedom. One can open study videos on his/her own time—no need of going to an institution for attending lectures.

Students can learn and complete online education courses within their own timeframe as compared to traditional learning.

Secondly, it gives proper education by experts in particular subjects. It takes less time to learn because the experts teach specific topics in less time.

People also think about safety point of view because road accidents are frequent in urban areas. In rural areas, online study apps give better options for education and the students get the benefits of experts for building their careers. The most important thing is everyone can learn through eLearning platforms.

Students don’t need to schedule lots of time to acquire the new courses. they can learn through their own devices at any time and anywhere.

Moreover, traditional learning has become expensive at present, whereas E-Learning is much cheaper than the former one.

Online Learning Vs Traditional Learning

The online learning vs traditional learning debate has been a topic of discussion in recent years. The question remains, is online learning as effective as traditional classroom learning? Traditional and Online learning institutions both have their advantages and disadvantages. One thing is for sure, the demand for online education is on the rise. Whereas Traditional classrooms have some positive social aspects that can be lost in some online virtual learning environments.

Traditional face-to-face classes provide teachers with opportunities to have a more personal interaction with students. When evaluating online classes vs. traditional classes, it is most important to consider your own unique learning style and scheduling needs.

Let’s explore the online learning vs traditional learning discussion further and weigh the pros and cons of each. Let’s know what are the Advantages & Disadvantages of E-Learning & traditional learning:

Advantages & Disadvantages of E-Learning

Advantages of e-learning:.

• One can learn on one’s own time.
• Students can study anywhere, with no restrictions on areas.
• Easy to choose subjects and topics.
• Students can interact with their teachers via social media, emails, SMS, etc.
• They can remain in contact with their teachers and get benefits.
• Students can even study in hazardous situations like heavy rain, storm, physical damage to the body, pandemics, or epidemic situations.
• It saves a lot of time for students. Get time freedom for other activities.
• Learn only the necessary things and avoid unnecessary topics.
• It is much cheaper than Classroom learning means it is cost-effective for learning.
• No need to travel up to the study Centre. Therefore, it protects us from road accidents.
• Teachers get additional income from online remote teaching .

Disadvantages of E-Learning:

• Lack of Face-to-Face Interaction: E-Learning lacks face-to-face communication, making it difficult for learners to ask questions, receive feedback, and develop interpersonal skills.
• Technical Issues: Reliable internet access and electronic devices are required, which can be a challenge for some learners, especially those from low-income backgrounds. Technical issues can disrupt the learning experience.
• Limited Structure: Online courses often lack the structure and routine of traditional classroom-based courses, leading to a lack of motivation or discipline, which can impact learning outcomes.
• Social Isolation: E-Learning can cause social isolation, limiting social interaction between learners, which is detrimental to social and emotional development.
• Limited Hands-on Learning: Some courses require hands-on learning, which may be difficult to achieve in an online setting, making it challenging for learners to gain practical experience.
• Lack of Self-Motivation and Time Management: E-Learning requires strong self-motivation and time management skills, which can be a challenge for some learners.
• Cheating Prevention: Preventing cheating during online assessments is complicated, ensuring academic integrity is a concern.
• Limited to Certain Disciplines: E-Learning is limited to certain disciplines, making it unsuitable for courses requiring practical training.
• Inaccessibility: Online learning is inaccessible to the computer illiterate population, creating a barrier to education.
• Lack of Accreditation & Quality Assurance: Online education lacks accreditation and quality assurance, raising concerns about the validity of online degrees.

Advantages & Disadvantages of Traditional Classroom Learning

Advantages of traditional classroom learning:.

The Traditional Learning Advantages are as follows:

• Students can remain in physical contact with their teachers and mentors so that they can ask questions directly to them and get satisfactory answers.
• They can develop a friendship with their classmates and others.
• Students can grow their network and compete with others.
• Experience different school, college and university activities.
• They have practical knowledge of various subjects in laboratories and fields. Therefore, they can have better knowledge.
• Students get their degrees physically and have better career opportunities.

Disadvantages of Traditional Classroom Learning:

The traditional way of education is much more expensive because teachers can teach less number of students at a time. Students have to pay much remuneration to their teachers.

• Students have to travel to educational institutions so they have to pay travel expenses and sometimes, they have accommodation charges when they stay in a hostel or pay guests.
• They don’t get flexibility in time although they have to reach the destination on time. They must attend lectures taken by the teachers otherwise, they miss them.

Traditional teaching has been around for thousands of years but we don’t suggest shutting down schools, colleges and also conducting online courses. They are essential skills for the overall development of a student because the traditional method has its own benefits like face-to-face interaction and developing interpersonal skills and group learning.

The debate on Traditional Learning vs E Learning or Traditional Learning vs Online Learning and the discuss on the traditional method vs the online method sparks a lot of questions about the education system. Similarly, the discussion on E-Learning vs Traditional Classroom Learning highlights the need for a balanced approach. Instead of replacing formal education with online education, they can be merged together to create a more effective, and interactive learning experience.

This way, students can enjoy the benefits of both Traditional Class vs Online Class methods. Therefore, the traditional method holds high value than online education but online learning is excellent for those who want to manage studies with work and other life activities.

• Difference between teaching and training
• How to Improve Online Teaching
• Basic Requirements Of Teaching

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

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

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

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

Online and face‐to‐face learning: Evidence from students’ performance during the Covid‐19 pandemic

Carolyn chisadza.

1 Department of Economics, University of Pretoria, Hatfield South Africa

Matthew Clance

Thulani mthembu.

2 Department of Education Innovation, University of Pretoria, Hatfield South Africa

Nicky Nicholls

Eleni yitbarek.

This study investigates the factors that predict students' performance after transitioning from face‐to‐face to online learning as a result of the Covid‐19 pandemic. It uses students' responses from survey questions and the difference in the average assessment grades between pre‐lockdown and post‐lockdown at a South African university. We find that students' performance was positively associated with good wifi access, relative to using mobile internet data. We also observe lower academic performance for students who found transitioning to online difficult and who expressed a preference for self‐study (i.e. reading through class slides and notes) over assisted study (i.e. joining live lectures or watching recorded lectures). The findings suggest that improving digital infrastructure and reducing the cost of internet access may be necessary for mitigating the impact of the Covid‐19 pandemic on education outcomes.

1. INTRODUCTION

The Covid‐19 pandemic has been a wake‐up call to many countries regarding their capacity to cater for mass online education. This situation has been further complicated in developing countries, such as South Africa, who lack the digital infrastructure for the majority of the population. The extended lockdown in South Africa saw most of the universities with mainly in‐person teaching scrambling to source hardware (e.g. laptops, internet access), software (e.g. Microsoft packages, data analysis packages) and internet data for disadvantaged students in order for the semester to recommence. Not only has the pandemic revealed the already stark inequality within the tertiary student population, but it has also revealed that high internet data costs in South Africa may perpetuate this inequality, making online education relatively inaccessible for disadvantaged students. 1

The lockdown in South Africa made it possible to investigate the changes in second‐year students' performance in the Economics department at the University of Pretoria. In particular, we are interested in assessing what factors predict changes in students' performance after transitioning from face‐to‐face (F2F) to online learning. Our main objectives in answering this study question are to establish what study materials the students were able to access (i.e. slides, recordings, or live sessions) and how students got access to these materials (i.e. the infrastructure they used).

The benefits of education on economic development are well established in the literature (Gyimah‐Brempong,  2011 ), ranging from health awareness (Glick et al.,  2009 ), improved technological innovations, to increased capacity development and employment opportunities for the youth (Anyanwu,  2013 ; Emediegwu,  2021 ). One of the ways in which inequality is perpetuated in South Africa, and Africa as a whole, is through access to education (Anyanwu,  2016 ; Coetzee,  2014 ; Tchamyou et al.,  2019 ); therefore, understanding the obstacles that students face in transitioning to online learning can be helpful in ensuring more equal access to education.

Using students' responses from survey questions and the difference in the average grades between pre‐lockdown and post‐lockdown, our findings indicate that students' performance in the online setting was positively associated with better internet access. Accessing assisted study material, such as narrated slides or recordings of the online lectures, also helped students. We also find lower academic performance for students who reported finding transitioning to online difficult and for those who expressed a preference for self‐study (i.e. reading through class slides and notes) over assisted study (i.e. joining live lectures or watching recorded lectures). The average grades between pre‐lockdown and post‐lockdown were about two points and three points lower for those who reported transitioning to online teaching difficult and for those who indicated a preference for self‐study, respectively. The findings suggest that improving the quality of internet infrastructure and providing assisted learning can be beneficial in reducing the adverse effects of the Covid‐19 pandemic on learning outcomes.

Our study contributes to the literature by examining the changes in the online (post‐lockdown) performance of students and their F2F (pre‐lockdown) performance. This approach differs from previous studies that, in most cases, use between‐subject designs where one group of students following online learning is compared to a different group of students attending F2F lectures (Almatra et al.,  2015 ; Brown & Liedholm,  2002 ). This approach has a limitation in that that there may be unobserved characteristics unique to students choosing online learning that differ from those choosing F2F lectures. Our approach avoids this issue because we use a within‐subject design: we compare the performance of the same students who followed F2F learning Before lockdown and moved to online learning during lockdown due to the Covid‐19 pandemic. Moreover, the study contributes to the limited literature that compares F2F and online learning in developing countries.

Several studies that have also compared the effectiveness of online learning and F2F classes encounter methodological weaknesses, such as small samples, not controlling for demographic characteristics, and substantial differences in course materials and assessments between online and F2F contexts. To address these shortcomings, our study is based on a relatively large sample of students and includes demographic characteristics such as age, gender and perceived family income classification. The lecturer and course materials also remained similar in the online and F2F contexts. A significant proportion of our students indicated that they never had online learning experience before. Less than 20% of the students in the sample had previous experience with online learning. This highlights the fact that online education is still relatively new to most students in our sample.

Given the global experience of the fourth industrial revolution (4IR), 2 with rapidly accelerating technological progress, South Africa needs to be prepared for the possibility of online learning becoming the new norm in the education system. To this end, policymakers may consider engaging with various organizations (schools, universities, colleges, private sector, and research facilities) To adopt interventions that may facilitate the transition to online learning, while at the same time ensuring fair access to education for all students across different income levels. 3

1.1. Related literature

Online learning is a form of distance education which mainly involves internet‐based education where courses are offered synchronously (i.e. live sessions online) and/or asynchronously (i.e. students access course materials online in their own time, which is associated with the more traditional distance education). On the other hand, traditional F2F learning is real time or synchronous learning. In a physical classroom, instructors engage with the students in real time, while in the online format instructors can offer real time lectures through learning management systems (e.g. Blackboard Collaborate), or record the lectures for the students to watch later. Purely online courses are offered entirely over the internet, while blended learning combines traditional F2F classes with learning over the internet, and learning supported by other technologies (Nguyen,  2015 ).

Moreover, designing online courses requires several considerations. For example, the quality of the learning environment, the ease of using the learning platform, the learning outcomes to be achieved, instructor support to assist and motivate students to engage with the course material, peer interaction, class participation, type of assessments (Paechter & Maier,  2010 ), not to mention training of the instructor in adopting and introducing new teaching methods online (Lundberg et al.,  2008 ). In online learning, instructors are more facilitators of learning. On the other hand, traditional F2F classes are structured in such a way that the instructor delivers knowledge, is better able to gauge understanding and interest of students, can engage in class activities, and can provide immediate feedback on clarifying questions during the class. Additionally, the designing of traditional F2F courses can be less time consuming for instructors compared to online courses (Navarro,  2000 ).

Online learning is also particularly suited for nontraditional students who require flexibility due to work or family commitments that are not usually associated with the undergraduate student population (Arias et al.,  2018 ). Initially the nontraditional student belonged to the older adult age group, but with blended learning becoming more commonplace in high schools, colleges and universities, online learning has begun to traverse a wider range of age groups. However, traditional F2F classes are still more beneficial for learners that are not so self‐sufficient and lack discipline in working through the class material in the required time frame (Arias et al.,  2018 ).

For the purpose of this literature review, both pure online and blended learning are considered to be online learning because much of the evidence in the literature compares these two types against the traditional F2F learning. The debate in the literature surrounding online learning versus F2F teaching continues to be a contentious one. A review of the literature reveals mixed findings when comparing the efficacy of online learning on student performance in relation to the traditional F2F medium of instruction (Lundberg et al.,  2008 ; Nguyen,  2015 ). A number of studies conducted Before the 2000s find what is known today in the empirical literature as the “No Significant Difference” phenomenon (Russell & International Distance Education Certificate Center (IDECC),  1999 ). The seminal work from Russell and IDECC ( 1999 ) involved over 350 comparative studies on online/distance learning versus F2F learning, dating back to 1928. The author finds no significant difference overall between online and traditional F2F classroom education outcomes. Subsequent studies that followed find similar “no significant difference” outcomes (Arbaugh,  2000 ; Fallah & Ubell,  2000 ; Freeman & Capper,  1999 ; Johnson et al.,  2000 ; Neuhauser,  2002 ). While Bernard et al. ( 2004 ) also find that overall there is no significant difference in achievement between online education and F2F education, the study does find significant heterogeneity in student performance for different activities. The findings show that students in F2F classes outperform the students participating in synchronous online classes (i.e. classes that require online students to participate in live sessions at specific times). However, asynchronous online classes (i.e. students access class materials at their own time online) outperform F2F classes.

More recent studies find significant results for online learning outcomes in relation to F2F outcomes. On the one hand, Shachar and Yoram ( 2003 ) and Shachar and Neumann ( 2010 ) conduct a meta‐analysis of studies from 1990 to 2009 and find that in 70% of the cases, students taking courses by online education outperformed students in traditionally instructed courses (i.e. F2F lectures). In addition, Navarro and Shoemaker ( 2000 ) observe that learning outcomes for online learners are as effective as or better than outcomes for F2F learners, regardless of background characteristics. In a study on computer science students, Dutton et al. ( 2002 ) find online students perform significantly better compared to the students who take the same course on campus. A meta‐analysis conducted by the US Department of Education finds that students who took all or part of their course online performed better, on average, than those taking the same course through traditional F2F instructions. The report also finds that the effect sizes are larger for studies in which the online learning was collaborative or instructor‐driven than in those studies where online learners worked independently (Means et al.,  2010 ).

On the other hand, evidence by Brown and Liedholm ( 2002 ) based on test scores from macroeconomics students in the United States suggest that F2F students tend to outperform online students. These findings are supported by Coates et al. ( 2004 ) who base their study on macroeconomics students in the United States, and Xu and Jaggars ( 2014 ) who find negative effects for online students using a data set of about 500,000 courses taken by over 40,000 students in Washington. Furthermore, Almatra et al. ( 2015 ) compare overall course grades between online and F2F students for a Telecommunications course and find that F2F students significantly outperform online learning students. In an experimental study where students are randomly assigned to attend live lectures versus watching the same lectures online, Figlio et al. ( 2013 ) observe some evidence that the traditional format has a positive effect compared to online format. Interestingly, Callister and Love ( 2016 ) specifically compare the learning outcomes of online versus F2F skills‐based courses and find that F2F learners earned better outcomes than online learners even when using the same technology. This study highlights that some of the inconsistencies that we find in the results comparing online to F2F learning might be influenced by the nature of the course: theory‐based courses might be less impacted by in‐person interaction than skills‐based courses.

The fact that the reviewed studies on the effects of F2F versus online learning on student performance have been mainly focused in developed countries indicates the dearth of similar studies being conducted in developing countries. This gap in the literature may also highlight a salient point: online learning is still relatively underexplored in developing countries. The lockdown in South Africa therefore provides us with an opportunity to contribute to the existing literature from a developing country context.

2. CONTEXT OF STUDY

South Africa went into national lockdown in March 2020 due to the Covid‐19 pandemic. Like most universities in the country, the first semester for undergraduate courses at the University of Pretoria had already been running since the start of the academic year in February. Before the pandemic, a number of F2F lectures and assessments had already been conducted in most courses. The nationwide lockdown forced the university, which was mainly in‐person teaching, to move to full online learning for the remainder of the semester. This forced shift from F2F teaching to online learning allows us to investigate the changes in students' performance.

Before lockdown, classes were conducted on campus. During lockdown, these live classes were moved to an online platform, Blackboard Collaborate, which could be accessed by all registered students on the university intranet (“ClickUP”). However, these live online lectures involve substantial internet data costs for students. To ensure access to course content for those students who were unable to attend the live online lectures due to poor internet connections or internet data costs, several options for accessing course content were made available. These options included prerecorded narrated slides (which required less usage of internet data), recordings of the live online lectures, PowerPoint slides with explanatory notes and standard PDF lecture slides.

At the same time, the university managed to procure and loan out laptops to a number of disadvantaged students, and negotiated with major mobile internet data providers in the country for students to have free access to study material through the university's “connect” website (also referred to as the zero‐rated website). However, this free access excluded some video content and live online lectures (see Table  1 ). The university also provided between 10 and 20 gigabytes of mobile internet data per month, depending on the network provider, sent to students' mobile phones to assist with internet data costs.

Sites available on zero‐rated website

Note : The table summarizes the sites that were available on the zero‐rated website and those that incurred data costs.

High data costs continue to be a contentious issue in Africa where average incomes are low. Gilbert ( 2019 ) reports that South Africa ranked 16th of the 45 countries researched in terms of the most expensive internet data in Africa, at US$6.81 per gigabyte, in comparison to other Southern African countries such as Mozambique (US$1.97), Zambia (US$2.70), and Lesotho (US$4.09). Internet data prices have also been called into question in South Africa after the Competition Commission published a report from its Data Services Market Inquiry calling the country's internet data pricing “excessive” (Gilbert,  2019 ).

3. EMPIRICAL APPROACH

We use a sample of 395 s‐year students taking a macroeconomics module in the Economics department to compare the effects of F2F and online learning on students' performance using a range of assessments. The module was an introduction to the application of theoretical economic concepts. The content was both theory‐based (developing economic growth models using concepts and equations) and skill‐based (application involving the collection of data from online data sources and analyzing the data using statistical software). Both individual and group assignments formed part of the assessments. Before the end of the semester, during lockdown in June 2020, we asked the students to complete a survey with questions related to the transition from F2F to online learning and the difficulties that they may have faced. For example, we asked the students: (i) how easy or difficult they found the transition from F2F to online lectures; (ii) what internet options were available to them and which they used the most to access the online prescribed work; (iii) what format of content they accessed and which they preferred the most (i.e. self‐study material in the form of PDF and PowerPoint slides with notes vs. assisted study with narrated slides and lecture recordings); (iv) what difficulties they faced accessing the live online lectures, to name a few. Figure  1 summarizes the key survey questions that we asked the students regarding their transition from F2F to online learning.

Summary of survey data

Before the lockdown, the students had already attended several F2F classes and completed three assessments. We are therefore able to create a dependent variable that is comprised of the average grades of three assignments taken before lockdown and the average grades of three assignments taken after the start of the lockdown for each student. Specifically, we use the difference between the post‐ and pre‐lockdown average grades as the dependent variable. However, the number of student observations dropped to 275 due to some students missing one or more of the assessments. The lecturer, content and format of the assessments remain similar across the module. We estimate the following equation using ordinary least squares (OLS) with robust standard errors:

where Y i is the student's performance measured by the difference between the post and pre‐lockdown average grades. B represents the vector of determinants that measure the difficulty faced by students to transition from F2F to online learning. This vector includes access to the internet, study material preferred, quality of the online live lecture sessions and pre‐lockdown class attendance. X is the vector of student demographic controls such as race, gender and an indicator if the student's perceived family income is below average. The ε i is unobserved student characteristics.

4. ANALYSIS

4.1. descriptive statistics.

Table  2 gives an overview of the sample of students. We find that among the black students, a higher proportion of students reported finding the transition to online learning more difficult. On the other hand, more white students reported finding the transition moderately easy, as did the other races. According to Coetzee ( 2014 ), the quality of schools can vary significantly between higher income and lower‐income areas, with black South Africans far more likely to live in lower‐income areas with lower quality schools than white South Africans. As such, these differences in quality of education from secondary schooling can persist at tertiary level. Furthermore, persistent income inequality between races in South Africa likely means that many poorer black students might not be able to afford wifi connections or large internet data bundles which can make the transition difficult for black students compared to their white counterparts.

Descriptive statistics

Notes : The transition difficulty variable was ordered 1: Very Easy; 2: Moderately Easy; 3: Difficult; and 4: Impossible. Since we have few responses to the extremes, we combined Very Easy and Moderately as well as Difficult and Impossible to make the table easier to read. The table with a full breakdown is available upon request.

A higher proportion of students reported that wifi access made the transition to online learning moderately easy. However, relatively more students reported that mobile internet data and accessing the zero‐rated website made the transition difficult. Surprisingly, not many students made use of the zero‐rated website which was freely available. Figure  2 shows that students who reported difficulty transitioning to online learning did not perform as well in online learning versus F2F when compared to those that found it less difficult to transition.

Transition from F2F to online learning.

Notes : This graph shows the students' responses to the question “How easy did you find the transition from face‐to‐face lectures to online lectures?” in relation to the outcome variable for performance

In Figure  3 , the kernel density shows that students who had access to wifi performed better than those who used mobile internet data or the zero‐rated data.

Access to online learning.

Notes : This graph shows the students' responses to the question “What do you currently use the most to access most of your prescribed work?” in relation to the outcome variable for performance

The regression results are reported in Table  3 . We find that the change in students' performance from F2F to online is negatively associated with the difficulty they faced in transitioning from F2F to online learning. According to student survey responses, factors contributing to difficulty in transitioning included poor internet access, high internet data costs and lack of equipment such as laptops or tablets to access the study materials on the university website. Students who had access to wifi (i.e. fixed wireless broadband, Asymmetric Digital Subscriber Line (ADSL) or optic fiber) performed significantly better, with on average 4.5 points higher grade, in relation to students that had to use mobile internet data (i.e. personal mobile internet data, wifi at home using mobile internet data, or hotspot using mobile internet data) or the zero‐rated website to access the study materials. The insignificant results for the zero‐rated website are surprising given that the website was freely available and did not incur any internet data costs. However, most students in this sample complained that the internet connection on the zero‐rated website was slow, especially in uploading assignments. They also complained about being disconnected when they were in the middle of an assessment. This may have discouraged some students from making use of the zero‐rated website.

Results: Predictors for student performance using the difference on average assessment grades between pre‐ and post‐lockdown

Coefficients reported. Robust standard errors in parentheses.

∗∗∗ p  < .01.

Students who expressed a preference for self‐study approaches (i.e. reading PDF slides or PowerPoint slides with explanatory notes) did not perform as well, on average, as students who preferred assisted study (i.e. listening to recorded narrated slides or lecture recordings). This result is in line with Means et al. ( 2010 ), where student performance was better for online learning that was collaborative or instructor‐driven than in cases where online learners worked independently. Interestingly, we also observe that the performance of students who often attended in‐person classes before the lockdown decreased. Perhaps these students found the F2F lectures particularly helpful in mastering the course material. From the survey responses, we find that a significant proportion of the students (about 70%) preferred F2F to online lectures. This preference for F2F lectures may also be linked to the factors contributing to the difficulty some students faced in transitioning to online learning.

We find that the performance of low‐income students decreased post‐lockdown, which highlights another potential challenge to transitioning to online learning. The picture and sound quality of the live online lectures also contributed to lower performance. Although this result is not statistically significant, it is worth noting as the implications are linked to the quality of infrastructure currently available for students to access online learning. We find no significant effects of race on changes in students' performance, though males appeared to struggle more with the shift to online teaching than females.

For the robustness check in Table  4 , we consider the average grades of the three assignments taken after the start of the lockdown as a dependent variable (i.e. the post‐lockdown average grades for each student). We then include the pre‐lockdown average grades as an explanatory variable. The findings and overall conclusions in Table  4 are consistent with the previous results.

Robustness check: Predictors for student performance using the average assessment grades for post‐lockdown

As a further robustness check in Table  5 , we create a panel for each student across the six assignment grades so we can control for individual heterogeneity. We create a post‐lockdown binary variable that takes the value of 1 for the lockdown period and 0 otherwise. We interact the post‐lockdown dummy variable with a measure for transition difficulty and internet access. The internet access variable is an indicator variable for mobile internet data, wifi, or zero‐rated access to class materials. The variable wifi is a binary variable taking the value of 1 if the student has access to wifi and 0 otherwise. The zero‐rated variable is a binary variable taking the value of 1 if the student used the university's free portal access and 0 otherwise. We also include assignment and student fixed effects. The results in Table  5 remain consistent with our previous findings that students who had wifi access performed significantly better than their peers.

Interaction model

Notes : Coefficients reported. Robust standard errors in parentheses. The dependent variable is the assessment grades for each student on each assignment. The number of observations include the pre‐post number of assessments multiplied by the number of students.

6. CONCLUSION

The Covid‐19 pandemic left many education institutions with no option but to transition to online learning. The University of Pretoria was no exception. We examine the effect of transitioning to online learning on the academic performance of second‐year economic students. We use assessment results from F2F lectures before lockdown, and online lectures post lockdown for the same group of students, together with responses from survey questions. We find that the main contributor to lower academic performance in the online setting was poor internet access, which made transitioning to online learning more difficult. In addition, opting to self‐study (read notes instead of joining online classes and/or watching recordings) did not help the students in their performance.

The implications of the results highlight the need for improved quality of internet infrastructure with affordable internet data pricing. Despite the university's best efforts not to leave any student behind with the zero‐rated website and free monthly internet data, the inequality dynamics in the country are such that invariably some students were negatively affected by this transition, not because the student was struggling academically, but because of inaccessibility of internet (wifi). While the zero‐rated website is a good collaborative initiative between universities and network providers, the infrastructure is not sufficient to accommodate mass students accessing it simultaneously.

This study's findings may highlight some shortcomings in the academic sector that need to be addressed by both the public and private sectors. There is potential for an increase in the digital divide gap resulting from the inequitable distribution of digital infrastructure. This may lead to reinforcement of current inequalities in accessing higher education in the long term. To prepare the country for online learning, some considerations might need to be made to make internet data tariffs more affordable and internet accessible to all. We hope that this study's findings will provide a platform (or will at least start the conversation for taking remedial action) for policy engagements in this regard.

We are aware of some limitations presented by our study. The sample we have at hand makes it difficult to extrapolate our findings to either all students at the University of Pretoria or other higher education students in South Africa. Despite this limitation, our findings highlight the negative effect of the digital divide on students' educational outcomes in the country. The transition to online learning and the high internet data costs in South Africa can also have adverse learning outcomes for low‐income students. With higher education institutions, such as the University of Pretoria, integrating online teaching to overcome the effect of the Covid‐19 pandemic, access to stable internet is vital for students' academic success.

It is also important to note that the data we have at hand does not allow us to isolate wifi's causal effect on students' performance post‐lockdown due to two main reasons. First, wifi access is not randomly assigned; for instance, there is a high chance that students with better‐off family backgrounds might have better access to wifi and other supplementary infrastructure than their poor counterparts. Second, due to the university's data access policy and consent, we could not merge the data at hand with the student's previous year's performance. Therefore, future research might involve examining the importance of these elements to document the causal impact of access to wifi on students' educational outcomes in the country.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The authors acknowledge the helpful comments received from the editor, the anonymous reviewers, and Elizabeth Asiedu.

Chisadza, C. , Clance, M. , Mthembu, T. , Nicholls, N. , & Yitbarek, E. (2021). Online and face‐to‐face learning: Evidence from students’ performance during the Covid‐19 pandemic . Afr Dev Rev , 33 , S114–S125. 10.1111/afdr.12520 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

1 https://mybroadband.co.za/news/cellular/309693-mobile-data-prices-south-africa-vs-the-world.html .

2 The 4IR is currently characterized by increased use of new technologies, such as advanced wireless technologies, artificial intelligence, cloud computing, robotics, among others. This era has also facilitated the use of different online learning platforms ( https://www.brookings.edu/research/the-fourth-industrialrevolution-and-digitization-will-transform-africa-into-a-global-powerhouse/ ).

3 Note that we control for income, but it is plausible to assume other unobservable factors such as parental preference and parenting style might also affect access to the internet of students.

• Almatra, O. , Johri, A. , Nagappan, K. , & Modanlu, A. (2015). An empirical study of face‐to‐face and distance learning sections of a core telecommunication course (Conference Proceedings Paper No. 12944). 122nd ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Seattle, Washington State.
• Anyanwu, J. C. (2013). Characteristics and macroeconomic determinants of youth employment in Africa . African Development Review , 25 ( 2 ), 107–129. [ Google Scholar ]
• Anyanwu, J. C. (2016). Accounting for gender equality in secondary school enrolment in Africa: Accounting for gender equality in secondary school enrolment . African Development Review , 28 ( 2 ), 170–191. [ Google Scholar ]
• Arbaugh, J. (2000). Virtual classroom versus physical classroom: An exploratory study of class discussion patterns and student learning in an asynchronous internet‐based MBA course . Journal of Management Education , 24 ( 2 ), 213–233. [ Google Scholar ]
• Arias, J. J. , Swinton, J. , & Anderson, K. (2018). On‐line vs. face‐to‐face: A comparison of student outcomes with random assignment . e‐Journal of Business Education and Scholarship of Teaching, , 12 ( 2 ), 1–23. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bernard, R. M. , Abrami, P. C. , Lou, Y. , Borokhovski, E. , Wade, A. , Wozney, L. , Wallet, P. A. , Fiset, M. , & Huang, B. (2004). How does distance education compare with classroom instruction? A meta‐analysis of the empirical literature . Review of Educational Research , 74 ( 3 ), 379–439. [ Google Scholar ]
• Brown, B. , & Liedholm, C. (2002). Can web courses replace the classroom in principles of microeconomics? American Economic Review , 92 ( 2 ), 444–448. [ Google Scholar ]
• Callister, R. R. , & Love, M. S. (2016). A comparison of learning outcomes in skills‐based courses: Online versus face‐to‐face formats . Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education , 14 ( 2 ), 243–256. [ Google Scholar ]
• Coates, D. , Humphreys, B. R. , Kane, J. , & Vachris, M. A. (2004). “No significant distance” between face‐to‐face and online instruction: Evidence from principles of economics . Economics of Education Review , 23 ( 5 ), 533–546. [ Google Scholar ]
• Coetzee, M. (2014). School quality and the performance of disadvantaged learners in South Africa (Working Paper No. 22). University of Stellenbosch Economics Department, Stellenbosch
• Dutton, J. , Dutton, M. , & Perry, J. (2002). How do online students differ from lecture students? Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks , 6 ( 1 ), 1–20. [ Google Scholar ]
• Emediegwu, L. (2021). Does educational investment enhance capacity development for Nigerian youths? An autoregressive distributed lag approach . African Development Review , 32 ( S1 ), S45–S53. [ Google Scholar ]
• Fallah, M. H. , & Ubell, R. (2000). Blind scores in a graduate test. Conventional compared with web‐based outcomes . ALN Magazine , 4 ( 2 ). [ Google Scholar ]
• Figlio, D. , Rush, M. , & Yin, L. (2013). Is it live or is it internet? Experimental estimates of the effects of online instruction on student learning . Journal of Labor Economics , 31 ( 4 ), 763–784. [ Google Scholar ]
• Freeman, M. A. , & Capper, J. M. (1999). Exploiting the web for education: An anonymous asynchronous role simulation . Australasian Journal of Educational Technology , 15 ( 1 ), 95–116. [ Google Scholar ]
• Gilbert, P. (2019). The most expensive data prices in Africa . Connecting Africa. https://www.connectingafrica.com/author.asp?section_id=761%26doc_id=756372
• Glick, P. , Randriamamonjy, J. , & Sahn, D. (2009). Determinants of HIV knowledge and condom use among women in Madagascar: An analysis using matched household and community data . African Development Review , 21 ( 1 ), 147–179. [ Google Scholar ]
• Gyimah‐Brempong, K. (2011). Education and economic development in Africa . African Development Review , 23 ( 2 ), 219–236. [ Google Scholar ]
• Johnson, S. , Aragon, S. , Shaik, N. , & Palma‐Rivas, N. (2000). Comparative analysis of learner satisfaction and learning outcomes in online and face‐to‐face learning environments . Journal of Interactive Learning Research , 11 ( 1 ), 29–49. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lundberg, J. , Merino, D. , & Dahmani, M. (2008). Do online students perform better than face‐to‐face students? Reflections and a short review of some empirical findings . Revista de Universidad y Sociedad del Conocimiento , 5 ( 1 ), 35–44. [ Google Scholar ]
• Means, B. , Toyama, Y. , Murphy, R. , Bakia, M. , & Jones, K. (2010). Evaluation of evidence‐based practices in online learning: A meta‐analysis and review of online learning studies (Report No. ed‐04‐co‐0040 task 0006). U.S. Department of Education, Office of Planning, Evaluation, and Policy Development, Washington DC.
• Navarro, P. (2000). Economics in the cyber‐classroom . Journal of Economic Perspectives , 14 ( 2 ), 119–132. [ Google Scholar ]
• Navarro, P. , & Shoemaker, J. (2000). Performance and perceptions of distance learners in cyberspace . American Journal of Distance Education , 14 ( 2 ), 15–35. [ Google Scholar ]
• Neuhauser, C. (2002). Learning style and effectiveness of online and face‐to‐face instruction . American Journal of Distance Education , 16 ( 2 ), 99–113. [ Google Scholar ]
• Nguyen, T. (2015). The effectiveness of online learning: Beyond no significant difference and future horizons . MERLOT Journal of Online Teaching and Learning , 11 ( 2 ), 309–319. [ Google Scholar ]
• Paechter, M. , & Maier, B. (2010). Online or face‐to‐face? Students' experiences and preferences in e‐learning . Internet and Higher Education , 13 ( 4 ), 292–297. [ Google Scholar ]
• Russell, T. L. , & International Distance Education Certificate Center (IDECC) (1999). The no significant difference phenomenon: A comparative research annotated bibliography on technology for distance education: As reported in 355 research reports, summaries and papers . North Carolina State University. [ Google Scholar ]
• Shachar, M. , & Neumann, Y. (2010). Twenty years of research on the academic performance differences between traditional and distance learning: Summative meta‐analysis and trend examination . MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching , 6 ( 2 ), 318–334. [ Google Scholar ]
• Shachar, M. , & Yoram, N. (2003). Differences between traditional and distance education academic performances: A meta‐analytic approach . International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning , 4 ( 2 ), 1–20. [ Google Scholar ]
• Tchamyou, V. S. , Asongu, S. , & Odhiambo, N. (2019). The role of ICT in modulating the effect of education and lifelong learning on income inequality and economic growth in Africa . African Development Review , 31 ( 3 ), 261–274. [ Google Scholar ]
• Xu, D. , & Jaggars, S. S. (2014). Performance gaps between online and face‐to‐face courses: Differences across types of students and academic subject areas . The Journal of Higher Education , 85 ( 5 ), 633–659. [ Google Scholar ]

Online Learning vs Traditional Learning

Attending college is no longer a one-alternative path. While in the past, you could only adapt to a schedule set by universities, it has come the time that you can now create your own schedule of lectures.

Hence, there are now two options of learning which are proving to work just fine, whether alone or blended. However, no method works the same for everyone. The same theory applies when choosing a plan that best suits you when absorbing knowledge. So let’s dig a little bit deeper into online learning vs traditional learning , and the perks of both of these educational methodologies. After, maybe you can decide which one to choose to contribute towards building your career.

What Is Brick and Mortar Education?

You can basically understand the context of brick-and-mortar education by its own name. Brick and mortar is the traditional way to attend college, with students coming to campus and attending class in physical classrooms.

Being still the most dominant form of pursuing an education, brick-and-mortar colleges allow students to interact with one another and discuss with teachers face-to-face. Probably this is what keeps this form of traditional learning still so much in demand, as students can communicate with others or ask questions personally to the lecturer. They feel more responsible regarding their exams, towards every deadline that comes their way, and commit to regular attendance.

However, this kind of college lifestyle does not suit the mindset of some other students. Attendance, location, lack of flexibility, and campus life are exactly the components that they find disturbing; therefore, they choose to withdraw. They know that them being late or absent is something that can be held against them later on in exams. Or maybe the schedule of lectures does not comply with their part-time job and makes their attendance in the class impossible. Overall, campus life sounds overwhelming, and little to no flexibility may as well feel like a threat to their willingness to learn. Luckily, technology made other options available to them.

What Is Online Learning?

Online learning is known as the education that takes place over the Internet. Often referred to as “eLearning”, or “distance learning” – online learning involves the umbrella term for any learning that takes place across distance and not in a traditional classroom.

Colleges nowadays use LMS (Learning Management Systems) such as Moodle, Blackboard, or similar software as a replacement for classes. Assignments are submitted online, discussions are in a forum format, and emailing professors is very prompt. This excellent learning methodology comes along with convenience, greater flexibility, and greater accessibility. Lessons can be completed around your schedule without leaving home or having to relocate depending on the rain, snow, or sunshine.

Even the costs are shorter as most online programs cost less than brick and mortar. That’s because room and board, parking, books, and attendance fees are not necessary. Still, you get the same benefits and level of knowledge as you would from traditional classrooms. For instance, our online degree programs here at Potomac University are designed and taught by industry professionals. We are dedicated to ensuring that the quality, relevance, and discipline of our online programs are the same as our on-ground programs. The online course presentations are updated regularly, taking into consideration the world’s constant academic evolution in online education.

Some of the cons of online programs may involve a lack of determination, low retention rates, and less social interaction . This is most likely the reason why fewer degree choices are offered online than through traditional learning. But if you have the willingness and commitment, you shouldn’t be discouraged.

Statistics on Online Classes vs. Traditional Classes

Online and traditional learning institutions both have their advantages and disadvantages. However, one thing is for sure: online education is here to stay, and its demand is on the rise. These statistics on how online learning stacks up when compared to traditional learning were gathered in early 2014. Enrollment in online universities continues to increase year after year. But how do these programs compare to traditional, face-to-face education?

Advantages & Disadvantages of Online Learning

Advantages :

• Fewer expenses – Perhaps the greatest perk of online learning is the low cost. Enrolling in an online program means you do not have to commute to class every day or even move to a different state to attend classes. By eliminating travel or moving expenses you automatically save a lot of money on food, books, and school supplies.
• Time-saving – This is kind of a given considering the lack of commute. By simply turning on your computer and joining an online class you save yourself the time it would take to get ready and go to class physically.
• Using technology – Attending online classes means you get to use technology more—thus automatically becoming more tech-savvy.
• More chances for interaction – Although this might sound contradictory, online learning can be great for increasing interaction in a class. An online class creates an environment where even students who are usually shy in traditional classes can participate.

Disadvantages:

• Isolation – Though it might be great for more reserved students, online classes can create a feeling of isolation for those who thrive by physically interacting with their peers.
• Lack of discipline – Remote learning can be counterproductive for students who lack self-discipline and require constant guidance from their teachers or peers.
• Requires training for instructors – For an online class to go smoothly and carry out its purpose, the professor needs to be trained in how to use the technology required to teach. In addition, instructors need to discover ways to get the best out of their students without them being physically present.
• Technical difficulties – Last but not least, in online learning there are more scenarios when something might go wrong due to technical problems such as loss of audio, video, or even overall connectivity.

Advantages & Disadvantages of Traditional Learning

Advantages:

• Increased interaction – It goes without saying that professors can get more interaction from their students if they are physically present in the classroom as opposed to remote learning.
• Hands-on learning – Traditional learning gives students a sense of security and control over their learning because they are present.
• Experience campus life – A big part of learning in college is being able to interact with all the students on the campus. While this is possible online, traditional classes certainly offer more opportunities.
• Networking – To add on the last advantage, more interaction with other students means you will be able to create a wider network that will help you in the future when you enter the workforce.
• Expensive – Enrolling in a traditional program means you will have to spend more on commute or relocation, food, supplies, etc.
• No flexibility – Unfortunately, if you are also working while studying, in-person classes offer virtually no flexibility in regards to attending classes.
• Time-consuming – Having to physically attend classes will take more of your time than online classes. This includes getting ready and possibly commuting to class.

The enrollment rate in Online Learning

• The total number of students enrolled in online courses: 6,700,000
• Current number of accredited online universities: 275+
• Amount of college students who have enrolled in at least one online course: 30%
• Whether online or in a traditional institution, 67% of college instructors believe video, blogs, podcasts, and other online media are necessary teaching tools.

What are students studying?

Most popular bachelor’s degrees for traditional learning.

• Elementary Education

Most Popular Bachelor’s Degrees for Online Learning

• Health Administration

Student’s perception of online education

• 77% of educators believe that online learning is just as good as traditional learning, if not better.
• Nearly 70% of all students claim online instruction to be as good as or better than in a traditional classroom setting.
• 26% of online students claim to learn better online than in a classroom.

Why is online learning more effective?

Although online learning has some minor disadvantages, the need for online learning, especially during the pandemic, has led to major improvements. Online classes are certainly more inclusive because even those that aren’t that well-off financially, or have other commitments can attend online classes.

Online learners’ score on standardized tests

• The average score of classroom learners: 50th percentile
• The average score of online learners: 59th percentile
• There is a 5:1 ratio by which learners differ
• A 5:1 ratio by which learners differ means that the slowest student takes 5 times as long to learn as the fastest student.
• 90% of these learners will successfully reach higher levels, but only if given enough attention.
• Face-to-face instruction is the best approach to providing these levels of attention.
• Fortunately, 97% of online institutions’ courses offer student/faculty ratios of 25:1 or better.

Online learning vs traditional learning costs

• Online degrees cost as little as 80 times less than traditional degrees
• Total average cost of traditional degrees: $85,000
• Total average cost of online degrees: $30,000

Did all of these stats make you feel determined enough? If so, contact us for more information about our online and classroom-taught degree programs.

INTERESTED IN LEARNING MORE?

Chat with an Admissions Officer Now!

This will only take a moment.

Message Received!

Thank you for reaching out to us. we will review your message and get right back to you within 24 hours. if there is an urgent matter and you need to speak to someone immediately you can call at the following phone number:.

By clicking the Send me more information button above, I represent that I am 18+ years of age, that I have read and agreed to the Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy , and agree to receive email marketing and phone calls from UOTP. I understand that my consent is not required to apply for online degree enrollment. To speak with a representative without providing consent, please call +1 (202) 274-2300

• We value your privacy.

• Associates Degree
• Bachelors Degrees
• Masters Degrees
• Doctoral Degrees
• Faculty & Staff
• Accreditation
• Student Experience

QUICK LINKS

• Admission Requirements
• Military Students
• Financial Aid

This website uses cookies. Learn more

E-learning Vs Traditional Learning: Which one is Better?

10 min read

 · Create Courses

E-learning Vs Traditional Learning: A Comparative Study

Features of traditional learning, the advantages of traditional learning, disadvantages of traditional learning, key features of e-learning, the advantages of e-learning, disadvantages of e-learning, which one is better, launch your online course with graphy.

“In this blog, we will do a comparative study of e-learning and traditional learning and try to find out which is the better alternative between the two.” 

With the changing times, how education is imparted is also changing. To be in sync with the times, the process of learning is also constantly evolving. Once, education happened only within the four corners of a classroom. Today, you can learn while sitting in any corner of the world. Education is transgressing its traditional boundaries and taking new forms every day, and this newly evolved form is popularly known as e-learning or online learning. 

I want to teach online GOT YOUR CONTENT READY? GRAPHY IS ALL YOU NEED TO GET STARTED!

But amidst all these changes, one question remains: E-learning vs. traditional learning : which one is better?

While both forms are equally prevalent today, this debate is never-ending. But to get a clear picture of both sides, with Graphy let’s do a comparative study of e-learning and traditional learning and try to find out which is the better alternative between the two.

So, let’s get started. 

Table of Contents

What is traditional learning?

Traditional learning refers to the real-life classes that happen within the four walls of the classroom. This category includes the kind of learning that happened within your school or college classroom where your teacher delivered an hour of lecture.

It is the most basic model where students learn from their teachers, interact with other students, and jot down notes and voice queries within a physical space. Traditional learning is a lecture-based model of learning where learning happens primarily through the knowledge that a teacher chooses to impart. No other mode of information finds its way into this traditional space. 

To make a clear demarcation between e-learning vs traditional learning, let’s have a look at some key features of the traditional method of learning. 

Related: Important factors affecting teaching in 2022

• Continuous face-to-face interaction between the educator and students. 
• Sole reliance on textbooks. 
• All students learn within the same environment.
• In a traditional learning space, the teacher is completely in control of the learning environment. 
• There is no space for distractions of any kind. 
• Learning always happens within a classroom at a predetermined time.

Advantages and disadvantages of traditional learning

The traditional method of learning comes with its own set of advantages and disadvantages. And that is why, while at times it is scrutinized for its effectiveness, it is still a widely acclaimed mode of learning. 

The question of e-learning vs. traditional learning : can be better answered once you are aware of both their positive and negative sides. Let’s begin by looking at the advantages and disadvantages of e-learning. 

I wan to teach online GOT YOUR CONTENT READY? GRAPHY IS ALL YOU NEED TO GET STARTED!

• Traditional learning has increased the scope for active learning. Students interact with their teachers and classmates and have face-to-face interactions, creating an active environment where learning happens in full swing. 
• Traditional learning not only aims to develop the subject knowledge of children but also helps them build interpersonal relationships with like-minded people of their age. 
• Traditional learning makes space for the practical aspects of learning. Chemistry, physics, or biology experiments can best happen in a traditional laboratory. 
• In traditional learning that happens on-campus, students have access to libraries. 
• In traditional learning, learning happens in a scheduled manner. There is a proper timetable that students and teachers need to follow. 
• There is space for extracurricular activities in the traditional mode of learning. 

Read:  How to create a training module: A step-by-step guide

• As traditional learning is time-bound, you cannot mold it to meet your needs. 
• In terms of cost, the traditional mode of learning is quite expensive in terms of infrastructure and maintenance costs. 
• Traditional learning methods are not inclusive of the needs of every child, they follow a rather generic approach. 
• Traditional learning mostly involves theory-based lessons as there is not much time for the practical aspects. 
• As traditional learning happens within a classroom space, the daily commute becomes a big disadvantage.
• The traditional method of earning is limited to geographical boundaries as physical presence is mandatory. 

What is e-learning?

E-learning refers to learning that happens within a digital space. It is a product of modern innovations where students don’t need to be physically present in front of their educators or teachers to learn from them. It makes use of the electronic medium to impart education. 

E-learning brings the world a lot closer. You can be sitting in Delhi, within the comfort of your room, and taking up classes offered by professors of Oxford. From YouTube to educational platforms like Unacadmey , all offer e-learning resources to students on every subject matter out there. You can simply pick the video or course of your choice and learn whatever you wish. 

In e-learning, your geographical location or your unavailability during a particular time period is never a hurdle to your learning process. You can learn anytime, from any place of your convenience. And it is this feature that gives e-learning an upper hand in the e-learning vs. traditional learning tussle . 

Related: How to find the best domain name for your online business in 2022 – Domain Name Guide

• It’s a coming together of different pedagogies like live sessions, recorded ones, presentations, discussion forums, etc. 
• Students can learn from any environment of their choice. 
• The scope of e-learning is immense, you can learn anything from the comforts of your room. 
• Makes space for self-paced learning. 
• Flexibility in terms of time and space. 

Advantages and disadvantages of e-learning

Both the advantages and disadvantages of e-learning became clearer during the COVID outbreak. While some became too comfortable with this mode of learning, others wanted to get back to the traditional model as soon as possible. 

While education could go on during subsequent lockdowns because of this said online mode of learning, it also brought to the forefront the problem of the digital divide. 

So, let’s have a look at some of the advantages and disadvantages of e-learning. 

• As mentioned before, online learning, or e-learning, is self-paced. You can set a schedule for yourself and learn whenever you find the time. 
• Unlike traditional learning, it is student-centered. 
• Once you invest in a good laptop and have stable internet connectivity, it is the most economical mode of learning out there. 
• You can customize your environment as per your preference. 
• Students can maintain continuous interaction with their teachers via emails, chatrooms, social media, etc. 
• It is not easily impacted by the outside environment and goes on even in the harshest of conditions. The finest example of this is how learning could go on because of this mode during the COVID outbreak.
• Online learning saves a lot of time as you don’t have to spend hours commuting to and fro from your campus. 
• There is not much space for feedback as one-to-one learning rarely happens. Especially if you are learning from an educational podcast or YouTube channel. 
• E-learning can deprive you of the social interactions that traditional learning offers. That limits your potential to develop your communication skills. 
• Evaluations get a little complicated in e-learning as preventing the use of unfair means is a bit difficult. 
• E-learning doesn’t work well with disciplines that require practical lessons, like medicine. 
• Digital illiteracy and the problem of the digital divide limit the scope of e-learning. 

Now it is time to come back to the question that we started with. From all that we covered till now, both the modes have their advantages and disadvantages, so, there is no clear winner in the e-learning vs traditional learning debate. 

What we feel is that rather than being about e -learning vs traditional learning, it should be about adopting a model that brings together the best of these two different modes of learning and tries to do away with the negative aspects of each other. We need to understand that they shouldn’t replace one another but be used together to build an effective mode of learning. 

• For instance, traditional modes of learning or classroom learning could be accompanied by e-learning to create access to more learning resources. 
• Teachers could screen online resources like educational videos, podcasts, or seminars in the classroom to aid the learning process. 
• Teachers could assign online readings to students, which they could then come discuss in class and pave the way for an interesting debate. 
• The more resources students will have access to outside of the classroom hours, the more knowledge they will bring to the classroom, and it will help students expand their horizons. 
• During harsh weather conditions, classes could be shifted online, and otherwise could go on as per the traditional model.

This is the kind of model that might help find a middle ground in the ongoing debate of e-learning vs traditional learning . Such a choice could satisfy both the factions and lead to the development of a model that works for all. 

Related: What is the ADDIE training model in 2022

If you are an educator trying to take your first step in the world of online teaching or e-learning, choose Graphy as your online course platform and build, launch, and market your online course with us. When you create a course with Graphy , you find yourself with several customization options. You can launch live lessons, add recorded ones, create a discussion board or forum, give presentations, and create an online course that stands tall on all grounds. 

Graphy offers advanced tools and features that will help you scale your business 10 times more. Features like:

• Branded mobile app and website
• Advanced marketing and sales tools
• Robust 24*7 customer support with a dedicated account manager
• Country-specific pricing with integrated payment gateways.
• Multi-layer content security and the list goes on. 

So, what are you waiting for? Join Graphy just like the other 40000+ creators and build your e-learning empire.

create your online course

market online course

sell online course

Teach online in india

E-learning vs. traditional learning

traditional learning

Top creators use Graphy to sell courses and memberships

Join 150K+ creators who have launched their online knowledge business using Graphy

You may also want to read

A Step-by-Step Guide To Build Your Own Branded Mobile App in 2024

Create Courses

Can You Start a Podcast with No Audience? Here’s How to Do It

How to Start Your Online Classes in 5 Simple Steps!

Previous Post

Traditional Learning and E-Learning Differences Essay

• To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
• As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
• As a template for you assignment

It is worth noting that instructions are slowly shifting from classrooms to distance learning. Therefore, in some instances, instructors and students are separated by distance and time. In 2000 to 2001, there were 2,876,000 students enrolled in distance learning in the US. Therefore, e-learning is giving a large number of people an opportunity to learn.

Some of the common technologies used in distance learning include video and audio tapes, television, computer and the internet. E-learning differs from traditional learning in flexibility, interaction and cost. Consequently, quality of e-learning differs from that of traditional learning. This essay provides an insight into the differences between e-learning and traditional learning. In addition, it tries to find out whether e-learning enables more people to participate in education.

E-learning differs from traditional learning in a number of ways. To start with, e-learning offers a student more flexibility than tradition learning. E-learning techniques such as Web Based Training allow a student to access training materials and exams anywhere and at any time. Students are, therefore, able to balance classes with their schedules. For that reason, a student finds time for classes and personal development.

Secondly, e-learning increases interactions in a class. Since most of the e-learning techniques use the internet, students are able to share ideas with others. These interactions are through emails and the social media. Students are also able to correspond with their lecturers using the same methods.

Therefore, e-learning is more interactive than traditional learning. Instructors also direct group discussions easily. Furthermore, E-learning interactions happen at any time since instructors and students do not have to meet face to face. In most cases, instructors clarify instructions to individuals instead of groups or audiences. Consequently, a student is able to understand specific contents quickly.

For that reason, E-learning is less passive than traditional learning. In e-learning, instructors only help students in learning. In this regard, a student spends more time learning alone. However, in tradition learning, a teacher has to explain all the course contents to a student. Therefore, e-learning provides more quality to students than traditional learning. The curriculum is also longer since a wide range of educational products is offered.

Thirdly, e-learning methods such as Web Based Training are cheaper than traditional learning. Classroom trainings require a highly trained staff. These staffs are required to coordinate instructors and students and ensure that educational materials are available. These problems are compounded when classes are rescheduled due to students failing to show up. Moreover, printed materials such as books and journals are very expensive. On the other hand, electronic books and journal are cheap. In some instances, they are free.

A school that uses e-learning has the opportunity to expand without building extra classrooms. The objective of many people who enroll for online classes is to advance their level of education or change a career. Therefore, e-learning mainly caters for people whose schedule cannot allow them to join regular classes. For that reason, e-learning enables more people to participate in education.

It can be concluded that e-learning is an excellent way of advancing one’s education. Additionally, e-learning is cheaper, more flexible and interactive than traditional learning. Therefore, e-learning offers students a better education than traditional learning. Most importantly, e-learning enables more people to enroll for classes than traditional learning.

Reference List

Gaeroff, G., “E-learning: Lessons from higher education”, Independent School , Vol. 63, No.4, 2004, pp. 64-70.

Grosze, M., E-learning vs traditional classroom instruction , 2004. Web.

Mupinga, D.M., “Distance education in schools: benefits challenges and suggestions”, The Clearing House , Vol. 78, No. 3, 2005.

• Parent Involvement and Educational Outcomes
• Advantages of Classroom Learning and Learning Alone Essay
• E-learning in Modern Education
• Principles and Practices of E-Learning
• The Hyperwave eLearning Suite
• Language experience with young children
• Knowledge Management in e-Learning
• Bilingual Education: Programs Support
• Components of the original IDEA
• Student Learning Outcome
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2018, December 11). Traditional Learning and E-Learning Differences. https://ivypanda.com/essays/e-learning-2/

"Traditional Learning and E-Learning Differences." IvyPanda , 11 Dec. 2018, ivypanda.com/essays/e-learning-2/.

IvyPanda . (2018) 'Traditional Learning and E-Learning Differences'. 11 December.

IvyPanda . 2018. "Traditional Learning and E-Learning Differences." December 11, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/e-learning-2/.

1. IvyPanda . "Traditional Learning and E-Learning Differences." December 11, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/e-learning-2/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Traditional Learning and E-Learning Differences." December 11, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/e-learning-2/.

Home — Essay Samples — Education — E-Learning — Online Learning Vs Classroom Learning

Online Learning Vs Classroom Learning

• Categories: E-Learning

About this sample

Words: 792 |

Published: Mar 19, 2024

Words: 792 | Pages: 2 | 4 min read

Table of contents

Introduction:, advantages of online learning:, disadvantages of online learning:, advantages of classroom learning:, disadvantages of classroom learning:, conclusion:.

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Dr. Heisenberg

Verified writer

• Expert in: Education

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

3 pages / 1223 words

5 pages / 2252 words

1 pages / 623 words

3 pages / 1214 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on E-Learning

The emergence of e-learning has revolutionized the way we approach education. With the advancement of technology, traditional classroom settings are no longer the sole method of learning. E-learning, also known as online [...]

Most of the college using the electronic textbook which purchase from some website or using the PowerPoint nowadays. A traditional textbook is made by hundreds of pages of information, but all of this information is being write [...]

Evaluation essays are a type of academic writing that assesses the quality, value, or effectiveness of a particular subject or topic. The purpose of this essay is to evaluate a chosen topic based on a set of criteria, and [...]

Although limitations should be in place to prevent unnecessary use of mobile phones, a 48-hour ban is not a healthy or effective solution. While prohibiting phones in the classroom may encourage students to focus on their [...]

As the modern world progresses and innovations in technology continue to expand, new challenges arise concerning the integration of these innovations into schools. Justin Banitt and his associates state that “in today’s [...]

In a study conducted on the effectiveness of the virtual classrooms and the traditional classroom, they concluded that the virtual classroom environment resulted in better mastery of course materials, greater student [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

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

Does E-Learning Give a Better Result than Traditional Learning?

2018, IJCSMC

The method of the learning change with the time and advancement in the world. But with the change in learning methods the increase in the learning choices, it becomes highly difficult for the learners to know that which learning method is more effective and improves their skills. Many of the studies stated that e-learning is far better than the traditional learning while some stated that traditional learning is better. So, because of this rising conflict this study examines which learning method is better and analyze is the e-learning method is better than the method of traditional learning in order to help learners, educators, and the institutions to adopt the best method. To examine we compare the benefits of both the learning methods and also the need for and the changing trend of the market and use the interview approach for collecting the data. The literature study also proved much helpful in constructing the result of this study. From all the analyses the review of the literature and interview responses revealed that e-learning is better learning method than the traditional learning and much gives better results according to students and the learners. The result reveal that e-learning offer various benefits like it is convenient, learner can learn from anywhere at any time, engagement level of the learners is also high in it, the cost is low, flexibility is high, offer the learners to learn new skills with managing their professional and personal life effectively, allow learners to take lecture number of times through audio-video recording of lectures, provide access to update the content, ensure quick delivery of the lessons, high consistency, scalability, less influence on the environment and positive impact on the organization profitability because of its effectiveness. All of these are not available in traditional learning and reduce its effectiveness in this global and complex world. Therefore, it is stated that because of all these benefits its adoption among the students and organizations all over the world enhance as compared to traditional learning.

Related Papers

IJCSMC Journal

Security remains a major challenge to most emerging technologies (ETs). Although, emerging technologies offer potential benefits which ease systems and human activities, but they also have some security issues that often affect their adoption and usage. Cloud technology has brought a lot of transformations to data storage for both individuals and organizations. Cloud offers flexibility for data storage, access and recovery, but it is not immune to the security challenges associated with other ETs. There have been concerns about data integrity and privacy of cloud customers. Outsourcing data in the cloud exposes the data to several kinds of attacks ranging from data leakage, data tampering, repudiation, Denial of Service (DOS) attack, spoofing identity, and unauthorized access to data. These attacks are often orchestrated by insiders and outsiders, and can compromise the confidentiality and integrity of cloud data. Most educational institutions are digitalizing their data which are ultimately moved to the cloud to be managed by a third party. Considering the sacred nature of educational data, the study examines the implications of cloud security challenges on education. The findings show that security is very significant to the successful migration and implementation of cloud technology in the educational sector. It also shows that the growing security limitations associated with cloud computing technology has the tendency to discourage many educational institutions from adopting cloud services. Therefore, there is need for all stakeholders particularly the cloud vendors to continuously upgrade cloud security system in order to effectively counter both existing and emerging cloud threats. This would go a long way to preserve the integrity and privacy of customers; increase clients" trust and patronage, and enhance safer cloud experience.

World Journal of English Language

NOOR FADZLINA MOHD FADHIL

E-learning has become an important mechanism for teaching and learning in the 21st century. However, little is known about the issues and challenges faced by students as one of the primary users of e-learning in higher education institutions. Thus, this research adopts a qualitative case study with a purposive sample of ten students in a public higher education institution to explore issues and challenges of e-learning usage. Rich Picture originated from Soft System Methodology (SSM) was applied to the case study to explore the issues and challenges faced by the students, specifically in using e-learning as a tool in their learning process. The Rich Picture can be a useful tool to understand and map complexity and to solve problems. A thematic analysis was employed to understand the intricate patterns of emerging themes for achieving patterns in the data. The findings specify that through e-learning, the issues and challenges are categorised into three main aspects which include peo...

The rapid growth of technological equipments in our societies has eased the educational system by means of using mobile learning. Mobile Learning is a sort of learning that happens when the learner is not in a specific location or learning that happens when the learner takes advantage of the learning opportunities offered by mobile technologies. This paper is based on design implementation where survey will be conducted in some selected institutions in Northern Nigeria to determine the efficiency and trends in using mobile learning in academic environments and also to review the essential mobile applications used in enhancing these activities.

Education and Information Technologies

Emeka Nwigwe

HyFlex termed as hybrid-flexibility is a teaching approach where teachers and students have the alternative to participate in planned courses either remotely or face-to-face. This study examines the effectiveness of the HyFlex pedagogical method to teach highly interactive digital and face-to-face cyber security training in Nigeria amidst the pandemic. Data was collected using a survey questionnaire from 113 participants to evaluate student’s perception towards the effectiveness of the Hyflex method using physical and Zoom teleconferencing which allow students to participate remotely in the cyber security training. The developed questionnaire comprising both open-ended and Likert-style questions was administered to purposely sampled participants. Findings from this study presents implementation details on how the HyFlex teaching model was implemented from a developing country context. Besides, findings present challenges and opportunities experienced with adopting the HyFlex pedagog...

Proceedings of the International University Carnival on e-Learning 2019

Ts. Dr. Siti Nurul Mahfuzah Mohamad

Learning disabilities are a problem that influences the brain's capacity to receive, process, analyze, and store information. These processing issues can interfere with learning fundamental abilities, especially for math. Fortunately, different approaches and methods in teaching and learning can improve students with learning disabilities to understand and know to count basic mathematic operations. This study focuses on the development of mobile game applications based online method to help student with learning disabilities understand basic mathematic operational especially addition and subtraction problem.

Journal of Education for Business

Margaret C . Keiper

International Information & Library Review

Doris Aduba

Shelley Kinash

Arthur Tatnall

Arts and Humanities in Higher Education, Sage

Katja Fleischmann

The heart of design studio teaching is traditionally linked to one-on-one teaching activities and to the exchange of feedback prompting many design educators to think it does not lend itself to online delivery. This study explored how design educators can translate the essence of design studio pedagogy into a blended learning environment. The four-year study involving 119 first-year undergraduate design students reports on the development, implementation, and iteration of a blended learning experience in an introductory design subject. The subject followed a flipped classroom model where video lectures, software tutorials, and additional readings were delivered online through a Learning Management System; practical face-to-face tutorials allowed students to work on their projects, present their work, and engage in the dialogical learning process. Student and design instructor feedback was collected to evaluate the changes and overall effectiveness of the design of the blended learning experience, which proved to be effective. Accepted version available here https://research-repository.griffith.edu.au/bitstream/handle/10072/392315/Fleischmann385192Accepted.pdf?sequence=5&isAllowed=y

Loading Preview

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

RELATED PAPERS

International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies (iJIM)

Vikas Rao Naidu

Martins E . Irhebhude PhD

International Journal of Advanced Science and Technology

Norazlina Mohd Yasin

International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management

Rajiv Sindwani

Norah Albadran

Journal of Information Technology Education: Research

Omar M . Horani , Nour Awni Albelbisi

International Journal of Language and Literary Studies

ali furqan syed

Journal of e-Learning and Higher Education

JOLLY SAHNI

Professional Discourse &amp; Communication

Mohammed Nasser

International Journal for Innovative Technology Integration in Education, 3(1)

Dr. Zubairu Suleiman

Lukman Suleiman

Raihanah M Mydin

Blended and Flipped Learning: Case Studies in Malaysian HEIs

Muhammad Sabri Sahrir

International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET)

Razwana Rahim

Asian Journal of Social Science and Management Technology

Jacqueline Żammit

The Agakhan University

Jacklyne O K E L L O Alari

Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Cognition and Exploratory Learning in Digital Age (CELDA 2019)

Afika Ntaba

TeachmeResearch2 SA

International Conference on Education (ICE 2019)

Muhammad Jeffery Hizwan

Muesser C. Nat

Olanrewaju Oyedotun

Applied Pedagogies for Higher Education

Cameron McAuliffe

International Journal of Education and Development using Information and Communication Technology

Michael D Sankey

The 5th Pre-University Conference

Krishnaveni Sritharan , MANGAIR KARASI MANICKAM

“Blended Learning in the New Normal: The Future of Education and Training

Prof Avgoustos Tsinakos

Asian Review of Accounting

Steven Dellaportas

Indonesian Journal of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science

Ismassabah Ismail

Manish Kumar

BiD : textos universitaris de biblioteconomia i documentació

Gema Santos-Hermosa

Independent Journal of Management & Production

Nidhi Natrajan

American International Journal of Social Science Research

Mahmud Abubakar

Universal Journal of Educational Research

m.z S Hamdan

Integrated Intelligent Research

Heather Hussey

Lawal Ibrahim

Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning

Jonathan Rossing

Fariza Khalid

RELATED TOPICS

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

• Free essays

We use cookies to make your user experience better.

By staying on our website, you fully accept it. Read more » It's OK

Online Learning vs. Learning in Traditional Classrooms

When studying online, it becomes difficult for students to clear their doubts. It is hard for a student to clarify something that he/she does not understand. This is because the student cannot consult an expert on that subject for further clarification. Students do not have the same ability to understand concepts. In a traditional classroom setting, the student is in direct contact with the professors, library, laboratory, and peer students. In a traditional classroom, the student is able to ask questions and get different interpretations of the problem. Moreover, he/she can gain an experience of using multiple methods of arriving at the solution. These methods provide adequate resources for student to clear doubts. This is not possible in an online learning program.

Get a price quote

Online classes are only necessary for people who are working and at the same time want to acquire a degree, or for people who have families and have to be at home to take care of children. Online education is for experienced people and not for starters.

Adults go to college to get a promotion at the work place. College campus has a lot of social activities and provides a good environment for interaction. Online classes are only beneficial for people who are trying to work and study at the same time. Online learning is most suitable for people who have families and have to be at home to take care of children. Online learning cannot be as effective as traditional classroom learning.

Research conducted by the National Survey of Students’ Engagement indicates that about 11 percent of adult students attending college in a traditional method spend about 25 hours a week studying and being involved in class activities out of the possible 168 hours a week. 40 percent of these students spend only about 10 hours a week. There is a huge difference between studying patterns of students aged between 18-22 years and adult students (Howard, Schenk, & Discenza, 2004).

Adults who are involved in online education are more successful in it than teenage students. This is because adult students are more mature and responsible than teenage students. College students are aged between 18 and 22 years. These students benefit mostly from traditional “live” college classrooms because of its social atmosphere. Social atmosphere in traditional classroom helps college students get away from their parents and interact with their age mates. Traditional college classroom gives freedom to students teaching them to be responsible. Young students look at college life as a social life. It is an opportunity for them to share ideas and interact with their age mates. College gives young students freedom to live on campus with friends and away from their parents.

Our outstanding writers are mostly educated to MA and PhD level

Traditional classroom teaching is more effective than online classes because the teacher is able to choose the most interesting methods of teaching a certain topic. The teacher achieves this through personal interaction with the student. Classroom teaching can be made enjoyable by organizing different in-class activities, projects, and group work where students can work together. These activities give students an opportunity to actively take part in the learning process. Students are able to share ideas amongst themselves, thus making the learning process more interesting.

Attending traditional classes gives students an opportunity to acquire hands-on skills by following what the teacher is doing. For young students, it is most convenient to attend traditional classes because interacting with other students enables them to understand simple concepts that appear so hard when tackled alone. If a student does not understand a certain concept, then clearing the doubt with the instructor can be very frustrating when studying online.

The major requirement for being successful in life is socialization. The presence of in-person interaction with the teacher and with other students creates a perfect environment for this kind of socialization.

The main disadvantage in a traditional classroom is distraction. In every classroom, there is at least one individual who has no desire to be in class. These individuals make comments that are misguided and out of context. This usually happens in high school and college. These students make these comments in an attempt to appear cool. These distractions prevent individuals with a real desire for learning from voicing their opinion. Most often, students with the most constructive opinions feel shy and are unable to contribute to a discussion and avoid snide comments that may follow. If such students were participating in an online class, they would have to formulate thoughts and arguments well before submitting them. This could help avoid unnecessary comments from students who do not contribute constructively. Also, if a person does not wish to contribute or feels bored, one can logout without distracting other students. This elimination of class distraction encourages people who have a real desire to learn. It also gives those who may feel bored in a class environment an opportunity to use their time doing other constructive things (Moore & Kearsley, 2011).

There is evidence of self-discipline in online learning, which provides an environment that resembles workplace. People are expected to be self-motivated and meet deadlines at the workplace.

Exclusive savings! Save 25% on your ORDER

Get 15% OFF your FIRST ORDER (code: leader15) + 10% OFF every order by receiving 300 words/page instead of 275 words/page

Most adult students have full-time jobs, and they may not have the time to attend classes. Most of the adult students are also parents, who have to take care of their families. This makes it difficult for adult students to participate in traditional learning methods.

The main advantage of online classes is that they are low-cost. If there was no online education and only traditional classes were available, most students would not afford to study.

When attending online classes, the student is able to schedule the classes as per his/her own time-table. There are no chances of crash programs or missed classes due to unavailability of the lecturer. Online classes also give students the opportunity to submit their assignments and sit for exams at their own convenience. Developments in technology have enabled students to proactively participate in online classes. Students are able to raise hands and ask questions through chatbox. The tutor can then answer the question immediately as other students also listen. There is a healthy discussion between individuals from different parts of the world, which encourages peer group learning. Improvement in technology has enhanced online learning to match the qualities of a traditional classroom.

Another advantage of online classes is that it helps the student avoid the hassle of having to commute to and from school and thus wasting a lot of time. Another issue that is tackled well in online classes is relevant for students who find themselves in trouble at school most of the time. Many students may drop out of school due to bullying. Some may be bullied and feel like they are not comfortable to attend school. Other students may be sent home by the administration after being accused of bullying. For these students, online classes can be a perfect option for them to study peacefully (Rudestam & Schoenholtz-Read, 2010).

How It Works

Online education may not be able to provide an opportunity to evaluate communication skills such as presentation. This makes it difficult for online classes to reflect the real working environment that the student will face at the workplace.

Studying online also has some distractions. There are also many opportunities that a student may use to cheat. A student may open a new window and login to a social website. Such students will waste a lot of time that could have been used studying. A student may also open a new tab when doing an exam online and search for answers online. It is also very possible for a student to let somebody else do the exam for him/her as the teacher is not physically around. There is no way for the teacher to ascertain that the student submits his/her own work. When reading or listening to a lecture online, the teacher does not have any control when the student is talking on a phone, playing games, or listening to music. These things cannot happen in a traditional classroom setting since students are forced to stay in class and pay attention to the lecturer.

Exposure to conflicting perspectives is the most crucial aspect of education. It promotes critical and adaptive thinking and enhances open-mindedness. The main aim of education is to help students think critically and creatively. Traditional classrooms are very effective at providing students with the opportunity to become creative (Hiltz & Goldman, 2005).

Our Benefits

• English-Speaking Writers
• Plagiarism-Free Papers
• Confidentiality Guaranteed
• VIP Services
• 300 Words/Page
• Affordable Prices

Children going through their middle and high school education may miss a key aspect that is necessary for brain development. Building knowledge at this level requires deep construction through looking at different perspectives. This can only be achieved through interaction dialogue, hands-on skills, and applications. Traditional classroom gives a student an opportunity to learn how to navigate social situations, explore more abstract and deeper concepts, and explore different methods of solving the same problem. Such opportunities cannot be found in online classes (Denton, 1998).

Online learning may provide students an opportunity to work at their own comfort. This is usually very fruitful when presented to adult students. This may have a deteriorating effect on young students aged below 24 years. Young students working at their own potential will stunt their brain development. At their age, the brain is developing and it needs to work under certain pressure to realize its full potential. This is why working under the assurance and comforts of online learning will not be as effective as getting education in traditional classrooms. Online class is a great supplemental tool for traditional classroom learning, but it cannot replace traditional classroom.

Students need teachers to demonstrate them what to do. Traditional classroom has many benefits such as teacher-student interaction and student-student interaction. These interactions play a vital role in the learning process. Online learning may cause a student to be detached and may hinder the process of learning.

Online education is fruitful if taken by a student who has already acquired the first degree. This is because interaction with the tutor and other classmates is vital for the student to understand most of the basic concepts (Darbyshire, 2005).

Our Customer Support Team is at Your Disposal 24/7

Online classes may be perceived as not having any distractions and can be taken up at the comfort of the learner. However, it is important to note that distractions are everywhere, even at home. Distraction in a classroom is often beneficial to a student because all students in that class have a common goal – to understand the concepts taught.