View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.
uk brought to you by CORE
provided by AIS Electronic Library (AISeL)
Journal of Information Systems Education, Vol. 25(2) Summer 2014
Online IS Education for the 21st Century
Wu He
Department of Information Technology & Decision Sciences
Strome College of Business
Old Dominion University
Norfolk, VA 23529, USA
[email protected]
Guandong Xu
Advanced Analytics Institute
Faculty of Engineering & IT
University of Technology
Sydney, Australia
[email protected]
S. E. Kruck
Computer Information Systems Department
College of Business
James Madison University
Harrisonburg, VA 22807, USA
[email protected]
ABSTRACT
Online teaching and learning have become increasingly common in higher educational institutions. These higher educational
institutions realize the growing importance of online learning in information systems/information technology (IS/IT) education
and are now offering online IS/IT courses and programs to students. However, designing, developing, teaching, and assessing
an online IS/IT course effectively is often a challenge. Many IS/IT instructors are new to online teaching and need orientation
and training for their own readiness in designing, developing, teaching, and assessing IS/IT courses in the online environment.
It is recognized that effective faculty are key to student success in online courses and to the success of online programs (Meyer
and Jones, 2012). Therefore, it is imperative that administrators and instructors of IS/IT courses and programs learn more of the
best practices of online teaching for high student success. This support to instructors and administrators is the purpose of the
Special Issue of the Journal of Information Systems Education.
Keywords: Online education, Distance learning, Web-based learning, Learning Management System (LMS)
1. INTRODUCTION In the area of information systems, more and more
information systems (IS), information technology (IT), and
Online learning has become an important way to deliver Management Information Systems (MIS) (collectively
courses in higher education. According to a recent SLOAN-C referred to as IS/IT) programs in the world are offering online
annual report (Allen and Seaman, 2013), over 6.7 million courses to their students. About 14 year ago only 2 online
students were taking at least one online course and 32% of programs existed that did not have a campus attendance
current higher education students have taken at least one requirement. At that time email was the primary
course online. Furthermore, over 69% of higher education communication method that was supplemented with web sites,
institutions now say that online learning is a critical part of electronic bulletin boards, web boards, listservs, and chat
their long-term strategy (Allen and Seaman, 2013). rooms. (Reif and Kruck, 2010). A current internet search
indicates that many universities (such as Washington State
101
Journal of Information Systems Education, Vol. 25(2) Summer 2014
University and Oklahoma State University) are offering their Dutton, Dutton, and Perry (2002) compared two large sections
IS/IT programs completely through online formats. These of a computer programming course and found that online
online programs offer IS/IT students the opportunity to earn students differed from lecture students in a number of
degrees without having to come to the physical university important characteristics. In particular, they found that online
campus location (Chong, et al., 2012; He and Yen, 2014). students earned significantly higher exam grades than lecture
As online learning becomes more prevalent and higher students. In intro to Java program courses, Settle and Settle
educational institutions continue to expand their online (2007) found distance-learning students were less satisfied
programs, more and more educators and organizations have than either traditional students or their peers in live sibling
become concerned with the quality of online courses (Abdous, sections based on the course evaluation.
2010; Rovai and Downey, 2010; Yang, 2010). In 2007, the Naaj, Nachouki, and Ankit (2012) conducted a survey to
AACSB (Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of understand students’ satisfaction with blended learning
Business) had recognized the growing importance of distance courses that use two delivery methods (i.e., face-to-face and
learning, in particular online courses and programs in business videoconference). They found that students preferred face-to-
schools and had formed a task force to develop guidelines. face courses even though they were satisfied with their grades
Currently, one of the items they look closely at during their and performance in blended learning courses. Swan (2001)
accreditation visit is if the school has adequate financial found that distance-learning students would rate the course
resources to provide technology support for students and poorly if excellent course organization did not compensate for
faculty appropriate to its online programs (AACSB, 2013). a lack of interaction.
Designing, developing, teaching, and assessing an online The above literature review reveals that existing published
IS/IT course effectively is often a challenge. Many IS/IT research on the effectiveness of different delivery methods
instructors are new to online teaching and need orientation and used in the same course is sometimes contradictory in its
training for their own readiness in designing, developing, conclusions.
teaching, and assessing IS/IT courses. It is recognized that
effective faculty are key to student success in online courses 3. ONLINE INTERACTION
and to the success of online programs (Meyer and Jones,
2012). Therefore, it is imperative that instructors and Social interactions in class mainly include student–instructor
administrators in schools of information systems learn more interaction and student–student interaction (Moore, 1989).
of the best practices and issues of designing, developing, The student–student interaction is also called peer interaction,
teaching, and assessing online IS courses and programs. which refers to the interaction between one student and
another individual student or group of students (Zha and
2. ONLINE COURSES VS. Ottendorfer, 2011). It is generally recognized that social
FACE-TO-FACE COURSES interactions make positive contributions to students’ learning
(Tu and McIsaac, 2002; Zha et al., 2006; Zha and Ottendorfer,
As more and more administrators and instructors are 2011). Collaborative learning theory stresses that students can
interested in developing and delivering online courses or broaden their knowledge base through interactions with other
programs, the awareness of the quality of online learning is learners (Roberts, 2004; Macfadyen and Dawson, 2010).
getting more and more important. There are substantial Many studies in the area of online learning found that social
concerns with the quality of online education compared with interaction is important in online learning environments. For
face-to-face classes (Abdous, 2010; Rovai and Downey, 2010; example, Shea, Fredericksen, Pickett, Pelz, and Swan (2001)
Yang, 2010). found that the quality and quantity of interactions are
Jahng, Krug and Zhang (2007) conducted a meta-analysis important to students’ satisfaction in online courses.
of student achievement comparison-related research and did Hrastinski (2009) proposes a theory of online learning as
not find any significant difference between online courses and online participation and suggests that "online learner
face-to-face courses in terms of student achievement. Larson participation is a complex process of taking part and
and Sung (2009) assessed the effect of three delivery methods maintaining relations with others, is supported by physical
(i.e., face-to-face, blended, and online) on student grades in an and psychological tools, is not synonymous with talking or
introductory MIS course taught by the same instructor. They writing, and is supported by all kinds of engaging activities".
found that student grades were not significantly different On the other hand, there is a growing body of research
across the three delivery modes. Carrol and Burke (2010) showing that online participation alone is not sufficient to
compared the final exam and course evaluations of two achieve deep and meaningful learning. Garrison, Anderson
sections of an MBA course: an online section and a face-to- and Archer (2000) propose the well-known Community of
face section. They only found trivial differences in the final Inquiry (CoI) framework which views the online learning
exam scores and student course evaluations. They concluded experience as a function of three elements: social presence,
that neither delivery method was more effective than the other teaching presence, and cognitive presence. According to
with regard to students’ achievement or their perceptions of Garrison and Arbaugh (2007) and Swan, Shea, Richardson,
course effectiveness. Ice, Garrison, Cleveland-Innes, and Arbaugh (2008), Social
On the other hand, Means, Toyama, Murphy, Bakia, and presence refers to the degree to which learners feel socially
Jones (2009) examined the comparative research on online- and emotionally connected with others in an online
versus-traditional classroom teaching from 1996 to 2008 and environment; teaching presence is defined as the design,
found that “on average, students in online learning conditions facilitation, and direction of cognitive and social processes
performed better than those receiving face-to-face instruction.” for the realization of personally meaningful and educationally
102
Journal of Information Systems Education, Vol. 25(2) Summer 2014
worthwhile learning outcomes; and cognitive presence students’ success. In a case study conducted by He (2013),
describes the extent to which learners are able to construct there was a strong correlation between the number of online
and confirm meaning through sustained reflection and questions students asked and students’ final grades in two
discourse. online upper-level undergraduate technology courses. Herbert
Studies show that social presence is an important factor in (2006) found that both students’ engagement and student’s
improving instructional effectiveness and building a sense of personal variables (e.g., demographics, prior academic
community (Tu and McIsaac, 2002). Furthermore, studies records) are important predictors of their completion of online
found that teaching presence in the form of facilitation is also courses.
crucial to the success of online learning and thus suggest that
instructors play a leadership role in triggering discussion and 5. SPECIAL ISSUE OVERVIEW
facilitating higher levels of thinking and knowledge
construction (Garrison, and Cleveland-Innes, 2005). This special issue “Online IS Education for the 21st Century”
Furthermore, Wu and Hiltz (2004) suggest that online teachers contains five interesting papers. The first article, “Anchoring
need to structure the interaction and give students more for Self-Efficacy and Success: An Anchored Asynchronous
guidance and devote sufficient time to ensure that students can Online Discussion Case” by Nimer Alrushiedat and Lorne
reach a high level of critical thinking and knowledge Olfman, employed two forms of online discussions: 1)
construction. Garrison, Anderson, and Archer (2001) suggest standard online discussions that tend to have long threads, and
that cognitive presence can be created and supported in online 2) anchored asynchronous online discussions that the student
environments with appropriate teaching and social presence. were required to create reference points between parts of a
document and comments in the discussion space to prevent
4. ABOUT ONLINE STUDENT RETENTION drifting from the context, thereby creating a focus. They
found that anchored asynchronous online discussions were
With the exponential growth of online courses in higher more likely to help increase students’ self-efficacy than
education, retention is an area of great concern. Online student standard online discussions. Plus, the students that
retention has been suggested as one of the greatest challenges participated in the anchored asynchronous online discussions
in online education (Herbert, 2006; Heyman, 2010). The scored statistically significant higher on exam.
attrition rates for online courses are frequently higher than for The second article, “Game-Based Experiential Learning
their campus-based counterparts (Bos and Shami, 2006; in Online Management Information Systems Classes Using
Heyman, 2010). Studies show that the dropout rate for online Intel’s IT Manager 3” by Michael Bliemel and Hossam Ali-
courses is 10 to 20% higher than for courses in traditional Hassan, used Intel’s flash-based game “IT Manager 3: Unseen
classroom environments (Frankola, 2001; Patterson and Forces.” They used this experiential learning tool in online
McFadden, 2009). Thus, it is imperative for higher management information systems class and found that this
educational institutions to develop practices and interventions experience was useful for students to reflect upon and apply
that can contribute to student retention in online courses and several IT management theories. Their paper demonstrates
programs (Pullan, 2011). how to adapt an existing simulation game, freely available on
One of the approaches is to harness the predictive power the Internet, to create a meaningful learning experience for
of most Learning Management System (LMS). Using data to students.
develop an early warning system and tools that identify at-risk The third article, “A Case Study Of Instructor Scaffolding
students and allow for more timely pedagogical interventions Using Web 2.0 Tools To Teach Social Informatics” by
to improving student retention is important (Macfadyen and Catherine McLoughlin and Sultana Lubna Alam,
Dawson, 2010). An effective early warning system could demonstrates that technological innovations which are
provide formative grade feedback to online students and could accompanied by pedagogical scaffolding promote effective
help online programs take proactive steps to intervene before teaching of social informatics. The case study found that
a student drops out or falls behind in the course. By improving Twitter and blogs were able to engage students’ in real-world
the retention of online at-risk students, educational institutions activities to learn key concepts, and that task scaffolding was
can bolster student satisfaction, increase student success, and an effective pedagogical approach.
raise graduation rates. The fourth article, “Lessons Learned from Migrating to an
As higher education institutions scale up their student data Online Electronic Business Management Course” by Kent
systems, all interaction are recorded and can be mined during Walstrom, describes a course that teaches students to manage
and after the course. During the online instruction, students the linkage between organizational strategy and enterprise
can choose to interact with course materials, and with information technologies, including e-commerce architecture.
instructors or other students via multiple communication Walstrom covers development from traditional face-to-face
channels. All related information (including every click, post, delivery to online delivery across a six and a half year time
response, and login) are tracked and are stored in back-end frame with lessons learned while migrating the course. Most
database systems and server logs. The stored data offers a issues were pedagogical that manifest themselves differently
great opportunity for data mining. The literature shows that, in different teaching environments. The good news is that
in general, students’ performance is highly related to their student performance and satisfaction remained mostly
engagement level in any given course (Hung and Crooks, consistent across delivery methods. The author’s reflections
2009; He, 2013). Macfadyen and Dawson (2010) found that include lessons learned and suggestions to aid in developing a
students’ participation and contribution to discussion boards course for online delivery.
in the LMS remain some of the strongest predictors for online
103
Journal of Information Systems Education, Vol. 25(2) Summer 2014
The final article, “Developing and Applying Smartphone and Text Mining. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(1),
Apps in Online Courses” by Gongjun Yan, Danda Rawat, Hui 90-102.
Shi, and Awny Alnusair, describe practical experience in He, W. & Yen, C. J. (2014). The Role Of Delivery Methods
designing and developing a smartphone platform for On The Perceived Learning Performance And Satisfaction
accessing online courses. The authors present the main Of IT Students In Software Programming Courses: A
technical issues of applying smartphones to online courses Case Study. Journal of Information Systems Education,
and discuss several key factors of designing, developing and 25(1), 23-34.
delivering online courses that support smartphone access. Herbert, M. (2006). Staying The Course: A Study In Online
The papers presented in this special issue illustrate the Student Satisfaction And Retention. Online Journal Of
extensiveness and potential of online IS educational research. Distance Learning Administration, 9(4). Retrieved
As an emerging research area, there is still much work to do February 13, 2015 from http://www.westga.edu/~distance
to improve online IS education with new methods, techniques, /ojdla/winter94/herbert94.htm
and emerging technologies. Heyman, E. (2010). Overcoming Student Retention Issues In
Higher Education Online Programs. Online Journal of
6. REFERENCES Distance Learning Administration, 13(4). Retrieved
February 10, 2015 from http://www.westga.edu/~distance
AACSB (2013). Quality Issues In Distance Learning. /ojdla/winter134/heyman134.html
Retrieved January 18, 2015, from Hrastinski, S.(2009). A Theory Of Online Learning As Online
http://www.aacsb.edu/~/media/AACSB/Docs/Accreditati Participation. Computers & Education, 52(1), 78-82.
on/Standards/2013-business-standards.ashx Hung, J. L., & Crooks, S. (2009). Examining Online Learning
Abdous, M. (2010). Operationalizing Quality Assurance in E- Patterns With Data Mining Techniques In Peer-
learning: A Process-Oriented Lifecycle Model. Moderated And Teacher-Moderated Course. Journal of
Proceedings of Global Learn Asia Pacific 2010, 731-736. Educational Computing Research, 40(2), 183–210.
Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2013). Changing Course: Ten Jahng, N., Krug, D., & Zhang, Z. (2007). Student
Years of Tracking Online Education in the United States. Achievement In Online Distance Education Compared To
Sloan Consortium. PO Box 1238, Newburyport, MA Face-To-Face Education. European Journal of Open,
01950. Distance and E-Learning. Retrieved January 5, 2015
Bos, N., & Shami, N. S. (2006). Adapting A Face-To-Face from http://www.eurodl.org/materials/contrib/2007/Jahng
Role-Playing Simulation For Online Play. Educational _Krug_Zhang.htm
Technology Research and Development, 54(5), 493-521. Larson, D. K., & Sung, C. H. (2009). Comparing Student
Carrol, N., & Burke, M. (2011). Learning Effectiveness Using Performance: Online versus Blended versus Face-to-Face.
Different Teaching Modalities. American Journal of Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 13(1), 31-
Business Education, 3(12), 65-76. 42.
Chong, D.Z., He, W., & Wu, H. (2012). Leveraging Cloud Macfadyen, L. P., & Dawson, S. (2010). Mining LMS Data
Computing to Support Experiential Learning in Distance To Develop An “Early Warning System” For Educators:
Education. IEEE Technology and Engineering Education, A Proof Of Concept. Computers & Education, 54(2), 588-
7(2), 17-19. 599.
Dutton, J., Dutton, M., & Perry, J. (2002). How Do Online Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M., & Jones, K.
Students Differ From Lecture Students. Journal Of (2009). Evaluation of Evidence-Based Practices in Online
Asynchronous Learning Networks, 6(1), 1-20. Learning: A Meta-Analysis and Review of Online
Frankola, K. (2001). Why Online Learners Drop Out. Learning Studies. US Department of Education. Retrieved
Workforce, 80 (10), 53-59. February 5, 2015 from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext
Garrison, D. R., & Arbaugh, J. B. (2007). Researching The /ED505824.pdf
Community Of Inquiry Framework: Review, issues, and Meyer, K. A., & Jones, S. J. (2012). Graduate Students Rate
future directions. The Internet and Higher Education, Institutional Websites: The Must Have, Nice to Have, and
10(3), 157-172. Delighted to Have Services. Journal of Asynchronous
Garrison, D., Anderson, R., T. & Archer, W. (2000). Critical Learning Networks, 16(1), 5-18.
Inquiry In A Text-Based Environment: Computer Moore, M. G. (1989). Three Types of Interaction. The
Conferencing In Higher Education. The Internet and American Journal of Distance Education, 3(2), 1–6.
Higher Education, 2(2-3), 87-105. Naaj, M., Nachouki, M., & Ankit, A. (2012). Evaluating
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2001). Critical Student Satisfaction With Blended Learning In A Gender-
Thinking, Cognitive Presence, And Computer Segregated Environment. Journal of Information
Conferencing In Distance Education. American Journal of Technology Education: Research, 11(1), 185-200.
Distance Education, 15(1), 7-23. Patterson, B., & McFadden, C. (2009). Attrition In Online
Garrison, D. R., & Cleveland-Innes, M. (2005). Facilitating And Campus Degree Programs. Online Journal of
Cognitive Presence In Online Learning: Interaction Is Not Distance Learning Administration, 12(2). Retrieved
Enough. American Journal of Distance Education, 19(3), January 18, 2015, from http://www.westga.edu/~distance/
133−148. ojdla/summer122/patterson112.html
He, W. (2013). Examining Students' Online Interaction in a Pullan, M. (2011). Online Support Services for Undergraduate
Live Video Streaming Environment Using Data Mining Millennial Students. Information Systems Education
Journal, 9(1) 67-98.
104
Journal of Information Systems Education, Vol. 25(2) Summer 2014
Reif, H. L. & Kruck, S. E. (2000). Towards An Understanding Guandong Xu is a senior lecturer and Analytics Education
Of Information Systems Related Disciplines And Online Program Leader in the Advanced
Degree Programs. Journal of Computer Information Analytics Institute, University of
Systems, Spring, 40(3), 58-61. Technology Sydney and he received
Roberts, T. S. (2004). Online Collaborative Learning: Theory PhD degree in Computer Science
And Practice. Information Science Publishing. from Victoria University, Australia
Rovai, A. & Downey, J. (2010). Why Some Distance in 2009. His research interests cover
Education Programs Fail While Others Succeed In A Web Data management and Web
Global Environment. The Internet and Higher Education, Analytics, Data Mining,
13(3), 141–147. Recommender Systems, Text
Settle, A., & Settle, C. (2007). Distance Learning and Student Mining, Social Analytics, especially
Satisfaction in Java Programming Courses. Journal of Social Network Analysis and Social
Universal Computer Science, 13(9), 1270-1286. Media Mining. His research has
Shea, P., Fredericksen, E., Pickett, A., Pelz, W., & Swan, K. gained funding from Australian governments and universities.
(2001). Measures Of Learning Effectiveness In The In last ten years, he has had over 90+ publications: He has
SUNY Learning Network. In Online Education: published three authored monograph books with Springer and
Proceedings of the 2000 Sloan Summer Workshop on CRC press, one edited scientific book with IGI-global
Asynchronous Learning Networks, 31-54. publisher, and seven conference proceedings along with
Swan, K., Virtual Interaction: Design Factors Affecting dozens of journal and conference papers including CJ,
Student Satisfaction And Perceived Learning In WWWJ, KAIS, CCPE, KBS, ESWA, JIIS, IJCAI, AAAI,
Asynchronous Online Courses, Distance Education, 22(2), WWW, ICDM, CIKM, DASFAA, WISE, and PAKDD. He
306-331. has been serving on editorial boards or as guest editors for
Swan, K., Shea, P., Richardson, J., Ice, P., Garrison, D. R., several international journals, such as the Computer Journal,
Cleveland-Innes, M., & Arbaugh, J. B. (2008). Validating Journal of Systems and Software and World Wide Web
A Measurement Tool Of Presence In Online Communities Journal, and he is the assistant Editor-in-Chief of World Wide
Of Inquiry. E-Mentor, 2(24), 1-12. Web Journal. He is also active in organizing or serving for
Tu, C. & McIsaac, M. (2002). The Relationship of Social international conferences and workshops. He is a PC Co-Chair
Presence and Interaction in Online Classes, American of 2014 IEEE/ACM ASONAM conference. He holds IEEE
Journal of Distance Education, 16(3), 131-150. and ACM membership.
Wu, D., & Hiltz, S.R. (2004). Predicting Learning From
Asynchronous Online Discussions. Journal of S. E. Kruck is a Professor of Computer Information Systems
Asynchronous Learning Networks, 8(2), 139–152. at James Madison University. Dr.
Yang, Y. (2010). Roles Of Administrators In Ensuring The Kruck received her BBA in Accounting
Quality Of Online Programs. Knowledge Management & and Computer Information Systems and
E-learning: An International Journal, 2(4), 363-369. her MBA from James Madison
Zha, S., Kelly, P., Park, M. K., & Fitzgerald, G. (2006). An University. She went on to complete
Investigation Of ESL Students Using Electronic doctoral studies and earn her Ph.D. in
Discussion Boards. Journal of Research on Technology in Accounting and Information Systems
Education, 38(3), 349-367. from Virginia Polytechnic Institute and
Zha, S. & Ottendorfer, C. (2011): Effects of Peer-Led Online State University. Dr. Kruck was
Asynchronous Discussion on Undergraduate Students' selected as the Madison Scholar for the College of Business
Cognitive Achievement, American Journal of Distance in 2006, the JMU Distinguished Faculty Award in 2007, one
Education, 25(4), 238-253. of the JMU Be the Change World Changers in 2008, and the
Accenture Professional Service Awards in 2011-12. She has
AUTHOR BIOGRAPHIES published in the Journal Information Systems Education,
Journal of End User Computing; College Teaching; Journal
Wu He received the B.S. degree in Computer Science from of Marketing Education; Information Management and
DongHua University, China, in Computer Security; Journal of Virtual Worlds; Journal of
1998, and the Ph.D. degree in Accounting Education; International Journal of Information
Information Science from the Security and Privacy; among others. Dr. Kruck is also a CPA
University of Missouri, USA, in in the state of Virginia.
2006. He is an Assistant Professor
of Information Technology at Old
Dominion University. His
research interests include Data
Mining, Information Security,
Social Media, Knowledge
Management and Computing
Education.
105
STATEMENT OF PEER REVIEW INTEGRITY
All papers published in the Journal of Information Systems Education have undergone rigorous peer review. This includes an
initial editor screening and double-blind refereeing by three or more expert referees.
Copyright ©2014 by the Education Special Interest Group (EDSIG) of the Association of Information Technology Professionals.
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this journal for personal or classroom use is granted without fee
provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial use. All copies must bear this notice and full citation.
Permission from the Editor is required to post to servers, redistribute to lists, or utilize in a for-profit or commercial use.
Permission requests should be sent to Dr. Lee Freeman, Editor-in-Chief, Journal of Information Systems Education, 19000
Hubbard Drive, College of Business, University of Michigan-Dearborn, Dearborn, MI 48128.
ISSN 1055-3096
