Encyclopedia of Education and Information Technologies

Living Edition
| Editors: Arthur Tatnall

Distance Learning

Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60013-0_66-1



Distance learning, as a label to describe the use of educational and information technologies for instruction and learning, suggests a shortcoming either in the way that the instruction is conceived and delivered or in the appropriateness of the instruction for learning by qualifying “learning” with the adjective “distance.” Were traditional or conventional classroom-based instruction described as, for example, “co-locational learning,” we might be tempted to focus on how learning is influenced specifically by material artifacts such as table and chair arrangements, lighting, ambient distractions, student-to-student proximity, and so on. While these are issues that are worth studying (and are indeed published in journals such as Learning Environments Research), they have been...

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


  1. Allen IE, Seaman J (2016) Online report card: tracking online education in the United States. Available online: http://onlinelearningsurvey.com/highered.html
  2. Allen M, Bourhis J, Burrell N, Mabry E (2002) Comparing student satisfaction with distance education to traditional classrooms in higher education: a meta-analysis. Am J Dist Educ 16(2):83–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Álvarez I, Kilbourn B (2002) Mapping the information society literature: topics, perspectives, and root metaphors. First Monday 7(1). Available online: http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue7_1/alvarez/index.html
  4. Bastiaens TJ, Martens RL (2000) Conditions for web-based learning with real events. In: Abbey B (ed) Instructional and cognitive impacts of web-based education. Idea Group Publishing, Hershey, pp 1–31Google Scholar
  5. Bereiter C (2002) Education and mind in the knowledge age. Lawrence Erlbaum, MahwahGoogle Scholar
  6. Berge ZL, Mrozowski S (2001) Review of research in distance education, 1990 to 1999. Am J Dist Educ 15(3):5–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bernard R, Abrami P, Lou Y, Borokhovski E (2004a) A methodological morass? How we can improve quantitative research in distance education. Dist Educ 25(2):175–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bernard RM, Abrami PC, Lou Y, Borokhovski E, Wade A, Wozney L, Wallet PA, Fiset M, Haung B (2004b) How does distance education compare with classroom instruction? A meta-analysis of the empirical literature. Rev Educ Res 74(3):379–439CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Biggs J (1999) What the student does: teaching for enhanced learning. High Educ Res Dev 18(1):57–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bloom BS (ed) (1956) Taxonomy of educational objectives: handbook 1. Cognitive domain. McKay, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  11. Bolliger DU, Halupa C (2018) Online student perceptions of engagement, transactional distance, and outcomes. Dist Educ 39(3):299–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bonk CJ, Dennen V (2003) Frameworks for research, design, benchmarks, training, and pedagogy in web-based distance education. In: Moore MG, Anderson WG (eds) Handbook of distance education. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, pp 331–348Google Scholar
  13. Bousquet M (2008) How the university works: higher education and the low-wage nation. NYU Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. Bransford J, Brown AL, Cocking RR, National Research Council (2000) How people learn: brain, mind, experience, and school. National Academy Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  15. Brooks D (2012) The campus tsunami. The New York Times, The Opinion Pages, May 3. Available online: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/04/opinion/brooks-the-campus-tsunami.html
  16. Chapman D (2005) Introduction to Learning Management Systems. In C. Howard, J. V. Boettcher, L. Justice, K. Schenk, P. L. Rogers, and G. A. Berg (eds.), Encyclopedia of Distance Learning (pp. 1149–1155). Hershey, PA: Idea Group ReferenceCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Connectivism 2008 (2008) Extended education and learning technologies centre, University of Manitoba. Available online: http://ltc.umanitoba.ca/wiki/Connectivism_2008#Week_9:_What_becomes_of_the_teacher.3F_New_roles_for_educators_.28November_3-9.29Google Scholar
  18. Davies RS, Howell SL, Petrie JA (2010) A review of trends in distance education scholarship at research universities in North America, 1998–2007. Int Rev Res Open Dist Learn 11(3):42–56Google Scholar
  19. Downes S (2008) Places to Go: Connectivism & Connective Knowledge. Innovate: Journal of Online Education, 5(1). Available online: https://nsuworks.nova.edu/innovate/vol5/iss1/6/?utm_source=nsuworks.nova.edu%2Finnovate%2Fvol5%2Fiss1%2F6&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages
  20. Dutton WH, Blank G (2014) The emergence of next generation internet users. IEEP 11:29–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Erdogan Y, Bayram S, Deniz L (2008) Factors that influence academic achievement and attitudes in web based education. Int J Instr 1(1):31–47Google Scholar
  22. Hale LS, Mirakian EA, Day DB (2009) Online vs. classroom instruction: student satisfaction and learning outcomes in an undergraduate allied health pharmacology course. J Allied Health 38(2):e36–e42Google Scholar
  23. Haughey M (2013) Distance learning. The Canadian Encyclopedia. Available online: http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/distance-learning/
  24. Herrington J, Oliver R, Reeves TC (2003) Patterns of engagement in authentic online learning environments. Aust J Educ Technol 19(1):59–71Google Scholar
  25. Hiltz SR, Shea P (2005) The student in the online classroom. In: Hiltz SR, Goldman R (eds) Learning together online: research on asynchronous learning networks. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, pp 145–168Google Scholar
  26. Hoeller K (2014) The Wal-Mart-ization of higher education: how young professors are getting screwed. Salon, February 16. Available online: http://www.salon.com/2014/02/16/the_wal_mart_ization_of_higher_education_how_young_professors_are_getting_screwed/
  27. Ivinson G (2000) The development of children’s social representations of the primary school curriculum. In H. Cowie and G. M. van der Aalsvoort (eds.), Social Interaction in Learning and Instruction: The Meaning of Discourse for the Construction of Knowledge (pp. 67–92). Kidlington, Oxford: Elsevier ScienceGoogle Scholar
  28. James WB, Gardner DL (1995) Learning styles: implications for distance learning. In: Rossman MH (ed) Facilitating distance education. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education Series, vol 67. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, pp 19–31Google Scholar
  29. Jonassen D (2008) Meaningful learning with technology. Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
  30. Kolowich S (2012) How will MOOCs make money? Inside Higher Ed, June 11. Available online: http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2012/06/11/experts-speculate-possible-business-models-mooc-providers
  31. Larreamendy-Joerns J, Leinhardt G (2006) Going the distance with online education. Rev Educ Res 76(4): 567–605CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Leckart S (2012) The Stanford education experiment could change higher learning forever. Wired Science, March 20. Available online: http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2012/03/ff_aiclass/
  33. Liao Y-KC (1999) Effects of hypermedia on students’ achievement: a meta-analysis. J Educ Multimed Hypermedia 8(3):255–277Google Scholar
  34. 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. U.S. Department of Education Report ED-04-CO-0040. Office of Planning, Evaluation, and Policy Development Policy and Program Studies Service, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  35. Mehlenbacher B (2003) Documentation: not yet implemented but coming soon! In: Sears A, Jacko J (eds) The human–computer interaction handbook: fundamentals, evolving technologies, and emerging applications. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, pp 527–543Google Scholar
  36. Mehlenbacher B (2010) Instruction and technology: designs for everyday learning. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MACrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Mehlenbacher B, Miller CR, Covington D, Larsen J (2000) Active and interactive learning online: a comparison of web-based and conventional writing classes. IEEE Trans Prof Commun 43(2):166–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Moore MG (1992) Distance education theory. Am J Dist Educ 5(3):1–6Google Scholar
  39. Naidu S (2003) Designing instruction for e-learning environments. In: Moore MG, Anderson WG (eds) Handbook of distance education. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, pp 349–365Google Scholar
  40. Newlin MH, Lavooy MJ, Wang AY (2005) An experimental comparison of conventional and web-based instructional formats. N Am J Psychol 7(2):327–336Google Scholar
  41. Nichols M (2003) A theory for e-learning. J Educ Technol Soc 6(2):1–10. Available Online: http://www.ifets.info/journals/6_2/1.htmlGoogle Scholar
  42. Orrill CH, Hannafin MJ, Glazer EM (2004) Disciplined inquiry and the study of emerging technology. In: Jonassen DH (ed) Handbook of research on educational communications and technology, 2nd edn. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, pp 335–353Google Scholar
  43. Pang K (2009) Video-driven multimedia, web-based training in the corporate sector: pedagogical equivalence and component effectiveness. Int Rev Res Open Dist Learn 10(3):1–14Google Scholar
  44. Pappano L (2012) The year of the MOOC. The New York Times, Education Life, November 2. Available online: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/04/education/edlife/massive-open-online-courses-are-multiplying-at-a-rapid-pace.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
  45. Pascarella ET, Terenzini PT (1998) Studying college students in the 21st century: meeting new challenges. Rev High Educ 21(2):151–165Google Scholar
  46. Peters JD (2003) Space, time, and communication theory. Can J Commun 28(4):397–411CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Petherbridge D, Mehlenbacher B (2007) Addressing the concerns of faculty adopting Learning Management Systems (LMSs). In: Proceedings of the Society for Applied Learning Technology (SALT) 2007 Washington Interactive Technologies Conference. SALT, Arlington, pp 1–14Google Scholar
  48. Pew Research Center (2018a) Mobile fact sheet. Available online: http://www.pewinternet.org/fact-sheet/mobile/
  49. Pew Research Center (2018b) Internet/broadband fact sheet. Available online: http://www.pewinternet.org/fact-sheet/internet-broadband/
  50. Phipps RA, Merisotis J (1999) What’s the difference? A review of contemporary research on the effectiveness of distance learning in higher education. The Institute for Higher Education Policy, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  51. Pittman VV (2003) Correspondence study in the American university. In: Moore MG, Anderson WG (eds) Handbook of distance education. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, pp 21–35Google Scholar
  52. Rothblatt S (1988) Review: supply and demand: the “Two Histories” of English education. Hist Educ Q 28(4):627–644CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Schnotz W (2005) An integrated model of text and picture comprehension. In: Mayer RE (ed) The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp 49–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Selber SA, Johnson-Eilola J, Mehlenbacher B (1997) Online support systems: tutorials, documentation, and help. In: Tucker AB Jr (ed) The computer science and engineering handbook. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 1619–1643Google Scholar
  55. 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 J Online Learn Teach 6(2):318–334Google Scholar
  56. Straus SG, Galegher J, Shanley MG, Moini JS (2006) Improving the effectiveness of army distributed learning: a research and policy agenda. Occasional Paper. Arroyo Center: Rand. Available online: www.rand.org
  57. Summers JJ, Waigandt A, Whittaker TA (2005) A comparison of student achievement and satisfaction in an online versus a traditional face-to-face statistics class. Innov High Educ 29(3):233–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Tarkoff S (2018) How the internet amplifies cognitive errors. The Portalist. Available online: https://theportalist.com/cognitive-errors-internet
  59. van Eijl PJ, Pilot A, De Voogd P (2005) Effects of collaborative and individual learning in a blended learning environment. Educ Inf Technol 10(1/2):49–63Google Scholar
  60. Wallerstein I (2012) Higher education under attack. Energy Bulletin, March 1. Available online: http://www.energybulletin.net/stories/2012-03-02/higher-education-under-attack
  61. Weissmann J (2012) Can this “Online Ivy” University Change the Face of Higher Education? The Atlantic, April 5. Available online: http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/04/can-this-online-ivy-university-change-the-face-of-higher-education/255471/
  62. Weston ME, Bain A (2010) The end of techno-critique: the naked truth about 1:1 laptop initiatives and educational change. Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment 9(6):5–10. Available online: https://ejournals.bc.edu/ojs/index.php/jtla/issue/view/150Google Scholar
  63. Wisher RA, Curnow CK (2003) Video-based instruction in distance learning: from motion pictures to the Internet. In: Moore MG, Anderson WG (eds) Handbook of distance education. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, pp 315–330Google Scholar
  64. Zhang D, Zhao JL, Zhou L, Nunamaker JF Jr (2004) Can e-learning replace classroom learning? Commun ACM 47(5):75–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of WaterlooWaterlooCanada

Section editors and affiliations

  • Don Passey
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Educational ResearchLancaster UniversityLancasterUK