My apologies if this has been posted before, but I came across an interesting study regarding the quality of on-line learning conducted by Babson College and the Sloan Consortium, and thought I'd share: http://www.sloan-c.org/resources/survey.asp Regards, Adrienne
Being a DL student myself, I have to agree with this study. If I might be so bold as to make some generalizations: Most of the kids I knew that went to brick and mortar (B&M) colleges following highschool, were more interested in parties, girls/guys, and the social aspect of college. Many more ONLY went to college because mom and dad made them go. Academics were secondary. Most of the DL students I know are older, have families, and are career oriented. DL students also tend to pay for their tuition from their own pocket, not mom and dad's. The findings of this study are not at all surprising to me. (Of course these are only generalizations...there are obvious exceptions on both sides.) What would be really interesting is a study that compared DL students to brick and mortar students, 5 or 6 years following graduation. I'll bet big $$$ that on average, the DL student retains more knowledge that his/her B&M counterpart. Don't get me wrong, I'm not at all against B&M schools. If I had the time, I'd go to one! I believe DL students tend to do well because, on average, they are more mature and focused than their B&M counterparts. Take a 35 year old father-of-two and stick him into a B&M college, I think he still does well. Take an 18 year old guy straight from highschool and stick him into a DL program, I believe he probably doesn't perform all that well over the long run. Tony
I'd agree with those generalizations. Before I knew DL stood for anything other than "Driver's License," I attended a large, very urban university. Because of rotating shifts at work, I often took both day and evening courses during the same semester, and was always struck by the contrast between the two "populations" of day students (typically traditional college-age) and evening students (most of whom were older.) The atmosphere in the evening courses was different- more focused. Students seemed better prepared for class, more willing to participate (despite coming from a full day of work or other obligations,) more willing to help each other out, and much less tolerant of distractions. Whether by consequence or coincidence, the instructors seemed to "teach harder," if that makes any sense. Ten years later, I see the same differences between my cohorts in online classes and students in the "live" sections of the same courses. Each mode of instruction draws a different, self-selected crowd, which makes comparing the relative performances of each set a study-design nightmare.
