2nd International Malaysian Educational Technology Convention

Exploring the Distance Learner’s Readiness on the

Use of Distance Technology

Siti Haryani Shaikh Ali, Wan Zah Wan Ali, *Rusli Abdullah & Ahmad Fauzi Ayub
Faculty of Educational Studies, Universiti Putra Malaysia
*
Faculty of Computer Science and Information Technology, Universiti Putra Malaysia

Abstract

This study attempted to explore the readiness of the distance learners for the distance technology,
namely communication, cooperation and collaboration tools. The following issues were investigated: how
experience the distance learners in using these technologies, how often these technologies were used,
how the distance learners perceived the importance of these technologies and which is the preferred
technology. Questionnaires were sent to 14 UPM’s distance learning centres across Malaysia, and 304
undergraduate distance learners responded to the survey. The study reveals that while the distance
learners do have the access to the necessary technologies and understand the benefits that these
technologies provide to distance learning, what they lack is the time and the skills to use these
technologies. The findings of this study is expected to help administrators, instructors, instructional
designers and tool developers to tailor the courses accordingly, develop a better tool and to provide
relevant support for the distance learners.

Introduction
Distance education provides opportunities especially for adult learners who wish to continue their studies.
Working adults turn to distance education for fast and successful career in corporate development. Those
who could not obtain formal education earlier, turn to distance education for lifelong learning.

The limitations of time inflexibility, lack of space and resources that were faced by traditional classrooms
had been eliminated by distance education. The media used to facilitate distance education has evolved
from printed materials to computer-supported communications.

In the period of 2001-2006, there was an increase in the number of institutions offering distance education
in Malaysia. Currently with 15% of distance learners from student population comes from the public
universities alone (Ministry of Higher Education, 2007), these universities are moving towards computer-
supported learning in distance education to disburse knowledge efficiently.

Despite the availability and the rapid advancement of technology, the distance learners themselves were
faced with challenges in their course of study. The major problem faced by Malaysia distance learners, as
identified by Dzakiria and Walker (2002), is a feeling of isolation. This finding coincides with the findings
by Hara and Kling (1999) who had found that the common problems faced by the distance learners are
the feeling of isolation and apprehensiveness due to lack of interaction either with the instructor or among
the distance learners themselves. Other common problems are the feeling of incompetency and lacking in
the learning skills needed to compete with other learners, lack of prompt feedback and feeling inadequacy
in technological skills (Dzakiria & Idrus, 2003).

Hence, it is suggested by Dzakiria and Idrus (2003) that the distance learners should take responsibility of
his or her own learning in the distance education environment, and the instructor would no longer be the
sole provider of knowledge. In order to achieve this, the distance learners need to communicate,
cooperate and collaborate among themselves via virtual groups as most of the learners were
geographically dispersed. Klemm (2004) claimed that “team learning in online computer conferences is
not widely practiced, but it can be very effective, even more so than face-to-face collaborative learning”
(Klemm, 2004). This view is supported by Lou, Bernard and Abrami (2006) that found that face-to-face
interaction with group members help students know each other better, reducing possible
misunderstandings and ill-feelings, which would be very beneficial for distance learners.

Institutions are moving towards computer-supported communications to encourage collaboration among

distance learners. The technologies involved can be classified as communication technology, cooperation
technology and collaboration technology, which terms were adapted from Chinowsky and Rojas’ (2003)
spectrum of technologies. This study investigated the readiness of distance learners for these distance
2nd International Malaysian Educational Technology Convention

technologies. The tools involved were email – representing communication technology, online discussion
forum – representing cooperation technology and real-time chat and web/video conferencing –
representing collaboration technology.

The following issues were investigated: how experience the distance learners in using these technologies,
how often these technologies were used, how the distance learners perceived the importance of these
technologies and which is the preferred technology.

Answers to these questions will help administrator and instructors to improve the infrastructures and
learning context for the distance learners. The findings will also be beneficial for tool developers and
instructional designers to make decisions on their services and products.

Literature Review
In this study, “distance technology” is defined by Chinowsky and Rojas’ (2003) spectrum of technologies,
as shown below:

Figure 1: Chinowsky and Rojas’ (2003) spectrum of technologies

Chinowsky and Rojas’ (2003) spectrum of technologies can be divided into three categories, namely
communication technology, cooperation technology and collaboration technology.

Communication technology
Communication technologies are mainly for information exchange and information delivery. The tools
involved could be asynchronous such as email and fax, and also synchronous such as telephone
conversations. Manipulation of data could not be done as the focus is solely on communicating
messages. Examples of the tools involved are telephone and email.

Research on communication tools such as telephones confirms that the tools are quick, efficient, cheap
and convenient (Nonyongo et al, 2008). In their research, Nonyongo et al. (2008) had found that in the
distance learning scenario, students bridge the gap of among students through increasingly accessible
technologies like cellphones and their SMS service.

Email is one of the asynchronous tools and it falls under cooperative technology under Chinowsky and
Rojas’ spectrum of technology (2003). Researches had indicated that email is more preferred than other
computer-mediated communication (CMC) tools (Curtis and Lawson, 2001) and mostly being used in
“reflective discourse” (Whipp, 2003).

Cooperative technology
Cooperative technology’s focus is to utilize information and develop team-level ideas and team tasks. The
tools involved are the one that allows information sharing and manipulation of data such as central
database and online discussion forums.

202
 2nd International Malaysian Educational Technology Convention

The online discussion forum also provides asynchronous type of communication. Forum is argued to
provide a deep and insightful mode of communication via general discussions, exchanging of ideas, focus
on specific areas and feedback from peers (Liu, 2005).

Collaboration technology
Collaboration technology’s main feature is to provide real-time communication and experiences for all
team members. The tools, such as real-time chat, web and video conferencing, are capable of
manipulating synchronous and real-time manipulation of project data.

Real-time chat provides synchronous type of communication. The conversation response is immediate,
and it can be used for “urgent decision making, team bonding, brainstorming and to socialize among
groups members”. (Garrison et al., 2003)

Web or video conferencing falls under computer conferencing, which is a synchronous type of
communication. Lee, Tan and Goh (2004) argue that computer conferencing makes learning more
“engaging and sustainable” as the audience can visualize the content delivery.

This study aims to investigate the readiness of distance learners for the distance technology, which
consists of communication, cooperation and collaboration technologies. The Centre for External
Education (Pusat Pendidikan Luar), Universiti Putra Malaysia was selected for the study. PPL is an
amalgamation of two centres, namely Institut Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran Jarak Jauh (IDEAL) and
Pusat Program Luar. PPL had started to offer its first distance education course (formerly under IDEAL) in
1995 via corresponding courses. Currently the centre had undertaken approximately 2000 registered
students, who attended the learning activities (face-to-face meetings, video conferencing sessions or
tutorials) at the respective learning centres.

Participants
The research participants for this study were the UPM’s distance learners. Questionnaires were sent to
14 learning centres across Malaysia, and 304 students responded to the survey.

Instrument
A survey on Online Learning and its Associated Technologies were developed. The questionnaire
consists of 3 main sections, namely Demographic and Skills, Technology and Groupwork. The analysis
for Groupwork is not included in this paper as this paper only focuses on the distance technology for
distance learners.

A 5 point scale was used to ask the participants to rate the perception of online learning and the
associated technology. An open-ended question was also included to gain further insights of the problems
faced by the distance learners. The responses to close ended questions were analysed by SPSS and the
open-ended question was analysed manually.

Procedure
The questionnaires were sent to 14 participating learning centres to 1724 distance learners. Four centres
had chosen not to participate in this questionnaire. A total of 304 responded to the survey. The
questionnaire was distributed on 18-20 April 2008, which was during the final examination. This was done
to improve the survey response rate, as all students were required to be at their respective learning
centres during the examination period.

FINDINGS AND RESULTS

Among the respondents, approximately 35% were male and 65% female, most of which (46%) were in
their Semester 4 and 5. Majority of the respondents were Malay (76%), followed by the Bumiputra Sabah
& Sarawak (19%), Indian (3%) and Chinese(2%). 90% of the respondents aged 26 – 45 years old, with
85% have a family.

203
2nd International Malaysian Educational Technology Convention

Table 1: The availability of technology for distance learners

Responses Percent of
N Percent Cases

Owns PC 234 49.4% 83.9%

Owns Laptop 172 36.3% 61.6%

Owns Webcam 43 9.1% 15.4%

Owns PDA 25 5.3% 9.0%

Total 474 100.0% 169.9%

As shown in Table 1, in terms of availability of technology, majority of the respondents owns the tools for
distance technology, with personal computer(PC) as the most popular tool (83.9% respondents owns a
computer), followed by laptop (61.6%), webcam (15.4%) and Personal Digital Assistant (PDA) (9%). Most
respondents (30%) claimed that they have had the experience of using the PC for more than 10 years,
but they used the internet much later, where 72% had claimed that they had the experience of using the
internet only for 5 years and below.

Despite the experiences, most of the respondents claimed that they used PC for academic use and to
surf internet only for 1 to 5 hours per week. This could be due to the nature of work and family
commitment that allows them limited time for PC usage and internet surfing. Respondents were asked
their most preferred location to access the internet. Interestingly, top three preferred locations where most
male respondents prefer to surf the internet were at the cyber café (65%), followed by at the office (57%)
and at home(53%); whereas females mostly surf the internet at home (70%), followed by the office (52%)
and at the cyber café (32%).

For online discussion forum and email, both tools were very rarely and never been used by the
respondents (52% for email and 81.4% for forum). Most respondents claimed average expertise level for
email(41%) but incompetent in forum (40%).

For the frequency of using chat, most respondents (79%) had indicated ‘Very rarely’ or ‘Never’. In terms
of expertise, 72% fall under ‘Average’ or ‘Incompetent’ levels. However, it is interesting to note that 85%
of the respondents had used various chat softwares – with Yahoo! being the majority of 80% - and only
15% had never used any chat softwares before.

Most of the respondents had disagreed that they liked to chat either with their own classmates or with
other people. Most were unsure of the cost, and 23% actually claimed that it is expensive to use chat
(sic). However, 73% disagrees that chatting is only a waste of time and 82% agrees that in overall,
chatting is good for PJJ programmes.

In terms of the frequency of using the video/web conferencing, 50.5 % had used the tools ‘very rarely’.
Majority (76%) claimed that their level of expertise was in ‘Incompetent’ and ‘Average’ level. However,
quite a number of respondents (34%) strongly prefer the video conferencing session currently held by
PPL. This method comes in second after face-to-face sessions, which is preferred by 40% of the
respondents.

Respondents were asked to rate the helpfulness of online learning with a five-point scale (1=least helpful,
5= most helpful). The items included of whether online learning can help the learners to divide their time
successfully, whether it can help the learners in their study speed and whether the learners get strong
peer support from online learning. On average, the respondents were unsure of whether online learning is
helpful in their studies (M= 3.3 , SD= 0.94).

204
 2nd International Malaysian Educational Technology Convention

70 68.6
60
50 49.5
43.9
40
30
20 20.5
10 6.6
0

ai l
e

at
ce

on
SM

Ch

Em
-fa

Ph
o
c e-t
Fa
Figure 2: Preferred discussion medium

The respondents were also asked on their preferred tools for discussion with their peers. Most of the
respondents still prefer face-to-face, followed by discussion over the phone, 23% prefer SMS, and finally
e-mail and chat. This shows that most respondents still prefer traditional face-to-face communications,
followed by communications via analog devices such as telephone conversations and SMS. These
technologies are the central to the function of team interaction and mostly used to communicate thoughts
(Chinowsky & Rojas, 2003). However, these technologies did not manipulate data in real-time and hence
did not allow the participants to experience a complete collaboration in a discussion. Real-time chat,
which is capable of transmitting synchronous and real-time data is the least preferred method. Further
analysis in the open-ended question revealed the reasons, which will be discussed below.

Respondents were also asked on the current learning activities where they should rate the most
preferred, preferred and the least preferred methods of current teaching activity available, and the results
are shown in Figure 3. Interestingly, although face-to-face is still the most preferred method, the
popularity is not as high as expected. Referring to Figure 4, only 40.5% of the respondents voted for face-
to-face to be the most preferred and preferred method of instruction. Video conferencing session (LIP)
comes close to second preferred method with 34.1% and followed by watching the recorded sessions of
video conferencing (PERL) with 25.4%.

80
70
60
50 Most
40
30 Pre ferred Face-to-face
20
10 Pre ferred LIP
0
PERL
L
L IP

Least
ce

R
PE
-fa

Pre ferred
- to
ce
Fa

Figure 3: Most Preferred, Preferred and Figure 4: Combination of Most Preferred

Least Preferred current method of and Preferred current method of
instruction instruction

Open ended question at the end of questionnaire provides a deeper insight of the results, and reveals the
possible reasons on why face-to-face is declining in popularity, and why video conferencing is increasing
in popularity.

Among the problems listed by the respondents, the most common problem across all respondents were
lack of communication, either with lecturers, tutors, PPL staff or among themselves. Classes and
timetables were sometimes changed without them knowing it. Unsatisfactory mediums, which were the
205
2nd International Malaysian Educational Technology Convention

tutors and the learning centres were the second common problems faced by the respondents. They
suggested that learning centres should be equipped with computer labs, and they should be able to view
the video conferencing sessions at the centres. As for the tutors, they hoped to get more knowledgeable
tutors for the subject matter and do not simply read from modules.

The miscommunication problems and unsatisfactory mediums stated above answers the questions on
why face-to-face is declining in popularity among distance learners and why the video conferencing is the
next preferred method. Video conferencing allows communication with lecturers. Although sometimes the
quality of the transmission was unsatisfactory, as one student puts it:
“Video conferencing sessions should be held for all subjects at all learning centres.”

Lack of study materials and insufficient skill to obtain the materials online is the third common problem. As
one of the respondents put it:
“.. it is difficult to find supporting learning materials as (am) not PC competent”

Lack of time is another common problems faced by distance learners, who were mostly have a family and
were working. They claimed that they have insufficient time to study, insufficient time to do the
assignments and insufficient time to prepare for the exams, which were 5 papers in 3 days.

Conclusion
This study attempted to explore the readiness of the distance learners for the distance technology,
namely communication, cooperation and collaboration tools. Major findings include that face-to-face is the
most preferred method, both in current method of learning and as a medium for discussion. However, the
popularity of face-to-face is declining due to problems such as incompetent tutors, the distance of learning
centres that makes it hard to commute and work/family commitment that happens to be on the same day
as face-to-face session.

For discussion purposes, most of the respondents prefer communication tools (telephone, SMS) and
cooperation tools (email and online discussion forum) as compared to the collaboration tools (real-time
chat and video/web conferencing). However, they were aware the advantages that the collaboration tools
provide and had actually agreed that real-time chat and video/web conferencing are beneficial for
distance learning courses.

The distance learners claimed that their level of expertise on all distance technologies were mainly
incompetent and average level. Except for email, to which most of the respondents claimed frequent
usage (once a week), other tools were used either rarely (less than once a month) or very rarely. This
corresponds with their average computer usage for academic use, which is only between 1 to 5 hours per
week. These findings coincides with the research done by Gustafson and Kors (2004) where they find
that top barriers to adoption of technology are lack of time and lack of skills.

In this study, the most common problems faced by the distance learners was communication Further
study should be made in order to determine whether lack of communication leads to lack of incentives or
motivation of the distance learners.

The findings of this study help add empirical data to the relevant research. It is also expected to help
administrators, instructors, instructional designers and tool developers to tailor the courses accordingly,
develop a better tool and to provide relevant support for the distance learners.

Future studies should consider other factors that may affect the distance learners in their readiness and
willingness to embrace the distance technology such as student characteristics and prior skills, group and
task characteristics, technology characteristics and the overall learning environment.

Limitations
A major limitation of this study is that the research sample was based on non-probability sampling. This
study is based on a convenience sample of undergraduates registered for distance learning courses in
UPM. As such, findings of this study can only be used by other groups which have the same
characteristics of this research.

206
 2nd International Malaysian Educational Technology Convention

References
Chinowsky, P. & Rojas, E. (2003). Virtual Teams: Guide to successful implementation. Journal of
Management in Engineering. 19(3), pp. 98-106.
Dzakiria, H. & Idrus, R. (2003). Teacher-Learner Interactions in Distance Education: A Case of Two
Malaysian Universities. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 4(3).
Dzakiria, H. & Walker, R. (2002) Unpublished. Frustrations and Learning Setbacks in Using Technology in
Distance Learning: A case study of DLs at Universiti Utara Malaysia. Paper presented at the 2nd
Pan Commonwealth Forum on Open Learning, Durban, South Africa.
Garrison, R., Anderson, T. & Archer, W. (2003). A theory of critical inquiry in online distance education. In
M. G., Moore & W. G., Anderson (Eds.), Handbook of distance education (pp.113-127). Mahwah,
New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Association.
Gustafson, K.K. & Kors, K. (2004). Strategic implications of an educational technology assessment.
Educause Quarterly, 27(2).
Hara, N. & Kling, R. (1999). Learners’ frustrations with web-based distance education course. First
Monday, 4(12).
Klemm, W.R. (2005). Use and Mis-Use of Technology for Online, Asynchronous, Collaborative Learning.
In Robets, T. (Ed) Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning in Higher Education. Idea Group
Publishing.
Lee, C., Tan, D. & Goh, W. (2004). The next Generation of e-learning: Strategies for media rich online
teaching and engaged learning. The International Journal of Distance Education Technologies.
2(4), pp. 1-18.
Liu, S. (2005). Faculty Use of Technologies in Online Course. International Journal of Instructional
Technology and Distance Learning, 2(8).
Lou, Y., Bernard, R.M. & Abrami, P.C. (2006). Media and Pedagogy in Undergraduate Distance
Education: A Theory-Based Meta-Analysis of Empirical Literature. Journal of Educational
Technology Research and Development, 54(2), pp. 141-176.
Ministry of Higher Education. www.mohe.gov.my [2007, September 4]
Nonyongo, E., Mabusela, K. & Monene, V. (2008). The Effectiveness of SMS Communication Between
University and Students. Institute for Continuing Education, University of South Africa.

207