





































Educational Leadership and the E-Learning Paradigm


Global Partners in Education Journal                                                                                                  April 2012, Vol.2 No.1, pp. 42-56 

www.gpejournal.org                      ISSN 2163-758X 
 
 

42 

 

Educational Leadership and the E-Learning Paradigm 
 

Cheryl Bostrom 
 

Bethel University, USA 
 

Abstract 
 

School systems today need leaders who are technologically savvy and 
can navigate the online environment. They must also have skills ranging 
from financial and human resource management to outcomes 
measurement, and government relations—all with a solid grounding in 
ethics and personal conviction. Some educational leaders are concerned 
that the online environment does not have the same high quality as the 
campus environment, but comparing campus and online classes may be 
like comparing apples and oranges because there are differences in the 
type and caliber of learners who choose one delivery model over the 
other, and there are differences in personality and communication skills of 
campus instructors and online instructors. After careful consideration of 
the potential benefits and challenges of the e-learning paradigm, it is 
reasonable to conclude that when it is done well, e-learning can be 
authentic and active. Quality online programs and global partnerships 
enable best practices institutions to develop professional adult educators 
and invest in faculty development of scholar-practitioners. 

 
Introduction 

 
In the Doctor of Education program at Bethel University, Dr. Craig Paulson and the 
program faculty are preparing educators for the rigor and challenges of educational 
leadership. Paulson understands that school systems need leaders who have a wide 
range of skills and a solid grounding in ethics and personal conviction. They must also 
be globally and technologically savvy. A unique aspect of Bethel’s program is its cohort 
model and delivery system that is transforming learners from around the world into 
public intellectuals. Learners participate in three summer residencies and complete the 
remainder of the course work online. The purpose of this article is to provide a review of 
benefits and challenges to e-learning as a resource for future educational leaders and 
for researchers in the pedagogy of e-learning. 
 
E-learning is a broad term that refers to electronically supported learning in higher 
education and K-12 schools. E-learning is naturally suited for institutionally sponsored 
distance education which began at Illinois Wesleyan University in the late 1800s 
(California Distance Learning Project, 2005). Fast forward to the invention of the World 
Wide Web, and the PLATO (Programmed Logic for Automated Teaching Operations) 
system designed for computer based education in the early 1960s. Originating at the 
University of Illinois-Urbana, the PLATO system pioneered the online community 



Global Partners in Education Journal                                                                                                  April 2012, Vol.2 No.1, pp. 42-56 

www.gpejournal.org                      ISSN 2163-758X 
 
 

43 

 

comprising forums, message boards, email, chat rooms, instant messaging, remote 
screen sharing, and multiplayer games (Woolley, 1994). 
 
E-learning has evolved since then. However, some educational leaders remain 
concerned about distance education and the expanding online environment, mainly 
because they do not believe it can have the same high quality as the campus 
environment. Comparing campus and online classes may be like comparing apples and 
oranges because there are differences in the type and caliber of learners who choose 
one delivery model over the other, and there are differences in personality and 
communication skills of campus instructors and online instructors. The variation in 
functionality and usability of technology including technical support staff, institutional 
server reliability and capacity, and the learners’ computers (Bender, 2003) also impede 
a direct comparison.  
 
After careful consideration of the potential benefits and challenges of the e-learning 
paradigm that are discussed in this article, it would be reasonable to conclude that e-
learning can help higher education administrators who are on the verge of making 
decisions about offering online programs, and K-12 teachers who are experimenting 
with activities that involve technology. When it is done well, e-learning can be authentic 
and active. Bender’s (2003) description of the ideal online learners is accurate: they 
seem to be a curious mix of independence in terms of being self-motivated, and a 
definite willingness to interact and collaborate. The ideal online instructors seem to be 
those who enjoy writing and do it well, practice a Socratic approach to teaching, 
personalize education, and are prepared to spend more time teaching online than they 
are used to spending in the campus classroom. The most effective online instructors are 
prepared to develop a comfort level and competence in using technology, so that 
technical frustrations can be minimized.  

 
The Potential Benefits of E-Learning 

 
The online learning environment can be beneficial in many ways, and the ideal courses 
for online delivery are those with the most potential for discussion, such as courses in 
the humanities, social sciences, and writing. E-learning also seems to fit adult learners 
who need to balance family, work, and education (Bender, 2003). The basic approach 
for an existing face-to-face course does not need to change when converting to an 
online course; however, the technique changes. Preserving the quality of a course need 
not mean finding an exact translation of what an instructor has always done in the past. 
In a face-to-face course, the instructor is a “sage on stage.” In an online course, the 
instructor is a “sage on page” who must pay particular attention to nuances in style, 
attitude, and intonation (Ko & Rossen, 2004, p. 12). Using a constructivist model to 
promote active learning with adults in a college classroom, however, King (1993) 
argued for a “guide on the side” approach (para. 4). In other words, the instructor is 
more of a facilitator or moderator than what Ko and Rossen (2004) referred to as an 
“expert from whom all knowledge flows” (p. 13). Exercises are fashioned to emphasize 
learner collaboration and deemphasize the traditional role of the instructor (Ko & 
Rossen, 2004). The perception of the online instructor as less formal may help 



Global Partners in Education Journal                                                                                                  April 2012, Vol.2 No.1, pp. 42-56 

www.gpejournal.org                      ISSN 2163-758X 
 
 

44 

 

instructors to engage in a lengthier debate and better challenge ideas than might be 
feasible on campus. Adult learners may appreciate more equality between the instructor 
and learner (Bender, 2003). 
 
Ko and Rossen (2004) asserted that Chickering and Gamson’s (1991) seven research-
based principles for good practice can be accomplished in the online learning 
environment. These seven principles include: 1) encourage contact between learners 
and faculty; 2) develop reciprocity and cooperation among learners; 3) encourage active 
learning; 4) give prompt feedback; 5) emphasize time on task; 6) communicate high 
expectations; and 7) respect diverse talents and ways of learning.  Shelton and 
Saltsman (2005) agreed that e-learning provides global access to learning, and 
accommodates different learning styles through interactive media delivered via the 
internet; it allows access to another culture on its own terms (Ko & Rossen, 2004) and 
the capability to better serve learners from educationally underserved areas (Bender, 
2003; Ko & Rossen, 2004) such as nontraditional, rural, and other learners (Zemsky, 
2007). E-learning can be authentic learning which is defined as an approach to teaching 
and learning that promotes higher-order thinking, and encourages learners to gain new 
knowledge and skills that build on ideas connected to the real world (Bender, 2003; 
Herrington, Reeves, & Oliver, 2010). 
 
The online learning environment offers convenience and freedom in when, where, and 
how the course is delivered, as well as the opportunity to offer specialized and 
advanced degrees (Bender, 2003; Ko & Rossen, 2004). It overcomes the limits of place 
and time (Zemsky, 2007). Bender suggested there is a continuous cycle of four 
processes when learning takes place: experience, reflection, conceptualization, and 
planning. Another benefit to online learning is these phases of learning can occur in 
different and perhaps more authentic environments.  
 
A constructivist approach is amenable to online learning (Glatthorn, 2000; Lucas, 2001). 
“Constructivism is a theory of learning based on the principle that learners construct 
meaning from what they experience; thus, learning is an active, meaning-making 
process” (Glatthorn, 2000, p. 6). The constructivist alternative challenges online courses 
to be project-based, requiring the learner to find, analyze, and synthesize materials 
found on the web, or to extrapolate meaning and conclusions from readings, discussion 
questions, and cohort members (Lucas, 2001). Learners are enabled to construct their 
own knowledge (Collison, Elbaum, Haavind, & Tinker, 2000). This theory is important to 
higher education curriculum because it enables learners to access knowledge that is 
used in solving open-ended, contextualized problems (Glatthorn, 2000).  
 
The e-learning environment brings people from around the world together. It extends 
and fosters critical reflection time; provides an opportunity to compose thoughtful, 
probing contributions; leaves little room for disengaged learners to “hide”; and it allows 
access to vast resources through hyperlinks for comparison or research (Collison et al., 
2000). Online learners can feel protected by anonymity. They are not interrupted when 
formulating responses, can respond when they feel inspired, and there is less hierarchy 
in terms of gender and racial differences (Bender, 2003). 



Global Partners in Education Journal                                                                                                  April 2012, Vol.2 No.1, pp. 42-56 

www.gpejournal.org                      ISSN 2163-758X 
 
 

45 

 

In the online classroom, instructors can avoid anxiety over gaining and sustaining 
learners’ interest over the time slot; remembering learners’ names; setting up the room; 
looking stupid or blanking out. Concerns are removed about wearing comfortable 
clothing and shoes; lacking inspiration; allowing enough time for traveling to and from 
class; and finding a parking space. It’s also easier to encourage every learner to 
participate and allows quiet learners to participate without being intimidated by 
domineering ones (Bender, 2003).  
 
Posting lectures online frees learners to concentrate on what is being communicated. 
Learners can review the material in its original form or catch up on material they missed 
because of illness or absence. Instructors can reevaluate older and possibly out of date 
course materials, improve organization and coherence, and increase comprehension 
when adapting a face-to-face course to online. Online tools such as email and virtual 
office hours can improve the flow of communication in the areas of counseling, advice, 
mentoring, and support (Ko & Rossen, 2004). It is important to note that some learners 
might feel resistant to online group work, being unable to conceptualize it, but in fact it is 
far more convenient to work asynchronously as a group online than it is in the real 
world, where there are all sorts of scheduling issues to agree upon. Role-playing fits 
superbly online (Bender, 2003). 
 
In online discussions, learners are able to relate education with experience, which 
according to Dewey (1938) is the optimal path to true learning. If a learner has missed 
an online synchronous conversation, the online conversation is archived and can 
therefore still be read after it has occurred. This is superior to having missed a meeting 
in physical space and time. Online chat is exciting and engaging. Time goes by quickly, 
and the instant gratification keeps the learners’ attention. It is familiar and easy for 
learners who are used to instant messaging, and it may appeal to nonlinear thinkers. 
Synchronous conversations fit the net generation lifestyles and habits (Bender, 2003). 
 
Ruhleder and Twidale (2000) presented similar key concepts of teaching and learning 
that can be accomplished in the online classroom. These concepts include the 
opportunity for learners to focus on collaboration, be reflective, benefit from the 
successes and mistakes of fellow learners, and learn by doing rather than in the 
abstract. True assessment is possible on a variety of challenging and rigorous learning 
activities on which learners receive frequent feedback and gain a sound idea as to how 
they are performing. Instructors who are supported by training can foster critical 
reflection and individual and collaborative learning that rivals, and may even exceed, 
traditional settings for instruction (Collison et al., 2000). Learners are given better 
access to certain faculty members and this helps dislodge bottlenecks for required 
courses (Zemsky, 2007). 
 
According to Zemsky (2007), e-learning eases communication for some learners; 
attracts learners who are more motivated; improves institutional flexibility; adds 
enrollments without the cost of new facilities; makes new markets for institutions and 
promotes risk-taking; and provides opportunity to experiment and share resources. 
Some opponents may argue that e-learning cannot engage all five senses. Conversely, 



Global Partners in Education Journal                                                                                                  April 2012, Vol.2 No.1, pp. 42-56 

www.gpejournal.org                      ISSN 2163-758X 
 
 

46 

 

Bender (2003) asserted that “not making use of all five senses may indeed lead to fewer 
distractions and greater ability to concentrate purely on the connections of thoughts and 
concepts” (p. 158). In the 2002 Sloan Consortium research report, faculty and learners 
reported high levels of satisfaction with online courses. They reported a high degree of 
interaction, easy access to online reference material, and thought online learning led to 
effective learning (Bender, 2003). 
 
Online education does not have an artificial learning environment as a result of 
scheduled time for learning to take place. Learners log on when they are ready to learn. 
Learners who are used to very large lecture halls may benefit from more personal 
attention online and from the diversity of learning opportunities that each medium 
potentially provides online. Resources are available throughout the duration of the 
course, increasing the opportunity for continued thought, reflection, and meta cognition 
because each learner can work to some extent at his or her own best pace (Bender, 
2003). 
 
E-learning develops writing skills (Collison et al., 2000). Often the generally slower act 
of writing rather than speaking allows time for new ideas, thoughts, and important 
connections to be made and communicated. Online learners acquire an important set of 
skills: express themselves with clarity in written form; work meaningfully from a remote 
location (telecommuting and conducting online research); develop skills of collaboration 
and interaction with others, despite the distance (Bender, 2003). Lucas (2001) made a 
significant point when she wrote that the increase in educational opportunities available 
via the internet makes it essential that valid methods for assessment be determined by 
the instructor and/or institution, and communicated to the learner at the outset of the 
program. This is a benefit to the entire institution. 
 
The results of two nonscientific focus groups conducted with learners at the master’s 
level at Bethel revealed additional benefits and all of their responses corroborated those 
already mentioned. The participants cited as benefits: the access to electronic 
resources in the library and on the internet; convenience for learners who travel; and 
learners are allowed to learn at their own pace and can delve more deeply into issues. 
Additionally, learners can interact with people outside the U.S.; they do not have to 
listen to people spouting off and can access only what is helpful or interesting to the 
learner; the ability to flex their schedule which can change from week to week; learners 
can participate in their pajamas; and virtual classrooms relieve campus space issues. 
From the review of literature and the results of the focus groups, a summary of the 
potential benefits of the e-learning paradigm is provided in Appendix A.  
 

The Potential Challenges of E-Learning 
 

Based on the preceding review of literature and Bethel focus group results, it is 
apparent that the online learning environment can be beneficial in many ways. 
However, there are also significant challenges that should be considered. Before the 
challenges are explored, it should be noted that newcomers to online teaching and 
learning are likely to exaggerate the computer expertise and infrastructure required. An 



Global Partners in Education Journal                                                                                                  April 2012, Vol.2 No.1, pp. 42-56 

www.gpejournal.org                      ISSN 2163-758X 
 
 

47 

 

online instructor only needs a basic familiarity with computers and the internet to be 
effective. Besides, “techies don’t necessarily make the best online instructors. An 
interest in pedagogy should come first, technology second” (Ko & Rossen, 2004, p. 16). 
Also, institutions may not ever be able to provide the level of support to which faculty 
think they are entitled (Ko & Rossen, 2004). 
 
It is not just the faculty who have expectations about technology support. In a panel 
discussion facilitated by Temares (2005), several expectations that today’s learners 
have were brought to light: safe and convenient access (high-speed wireless available 
across campus and virus protection); access to software to complement course work; 
professors who are fluent in current technology; 24-hour labs and assistance; electronic 
access to professor ratings; more social networking software; text-messaging abilities 
with professor; more of an interactive learning environment; professors who are 
responsive and engaging for all learning styles; and learners do not seem to feel much 
responsibility (illegal file sharing and tying up the network). 
 
Other challenges of online education include the fact that efficacy may vary according to 
discipline or field of study, and academic libraries are anxious about their role in 
teaching and learning, the need to expand entrepreneurial roles, and the pressure to 
produce new services. In the online classroom, instructors may have anxiety over using 
technology; knowing less about technology than the learners do; losing command of the 
class; becoming tied to the computer (lacking boundaries); making sure tone/personality 
is coming through; engaging all learners; being unprepared; building community; not 
being able to meet the same outcomes when adapting a face-to-face course to an 
online course (Bender, 2003). Also, adapting a face-to-face course for online is initially 
time consuming for the instructor, especially online lectures (Ko & Rossen, 2004). 
 
There are benefits to cross-cultural exchanges online; however, there are also some 
obstacles. Some of these obstacles include: language of instruction (including the 
textbook); cultural patterns of learning; differing guidelines regarding writing; rules about 
plagiarism and originality, and ideas about time and frequency of communication; real-
time activities because of differing time zones; limited internet access and unstable 
telephone connections in some countries; observing different religious and secular 
holidays (Ko & Rossen, 2004). Synchronous online conversations favor fast typists, not 
necessarily the best learners. This type of conversation can feel a little hectic and 
disjointed as several conversations can be going on at the same time. Messages have 
to be short; there is little chance to correct spelling and grammar mistakes. It is difficult 
to allow time for silence and for a reflective environment and learning in depth. There 
may be an extra challenge for disabled learners (Bender, 2003). 
 
In a panel discussion facilitated by Zemsky (2007), the perception that online learning 
discourages active learning was cited as a challenge to the e-learning paradigm. Other 
challenges raised by the panelists include the following: it discourages peer-to-peer 
socialization opportunities; requires more academic support to help learners succeed; 
limits use by older people who are not familiar with technology; restricts financial aid 
opportunities that may not be available for e-learners; curbs a professor’s ability to 



Global Partners in Education Journal                                                                                                  April 2012, Vol.2 No.1, pp. 42-56 

www.gpejournal.org                      ISSN 2163-758X 
 
 

48 

 

communicate passion for his or her subject; increases work for faculty members; 
creates more intellectual property issues and security issues. All instructors, whether on 
campus or online, need to remember that every use for an educational purpose is not a 
fair use. For example, instructors hand out copies of the same newspaper article year 
after year without permission. New technologies, however, are increasing the potential 
for copyright infringements (Crews, 2003; Shaw & Shaw, 2003). Also, information on the 
web is of variable quality because there are no standards of control as to what is posted 
(Bender, 2003). 
 
Similar to the results of the two nonscientific focus groups conducted with learners at 
the master’s level at Bethel, participants revealed additional challenges to e-learning 
and corroborated some of those already mentioned. If learners use the computer at 
work, they do not always feel like working on the computer when they get home. 
Learners’ technology levels vary, and they cannot see people’s faces and what they 
look like (unless using video conferencing or a roster with photos). The lack of verbal 
and nonverbal queues makes the handling of conflict and controversy more difficult. 
Having an online discussion is much more time-consuming, and it is difficult to establish 
boundaries, especially if learns are not self-motivated. Learners may not feel the same 
level of accountability to be prepared for class, and faculty may feel like they can never 
turn their computer off. Focus group participants mentioned that organizations are 
skeptical about the credibility of an online education and favor hiring people with face-
to-face degrees.  Therefore, offering an online degree may hurt a school’s reputation if 
the program is not accredited. These concerns should be addressed in the formation of 
online postsecondary programs, as well as high school activities that foster relationships 
with global partners. From the review of literature and the results of the focus groups, a 
summary of the potential challenges of the e-learning paradigm is provided in Appendix 
B. 

 
Conclusions 

 
Several contradictions can be identified related to the potential benefits and challenges 
in the e-learning environment. For learners, the online classroom provides global 
access to learning, but limits real-time activities because of differing time zones. The 
online classroom provides the capability to better serve learners from educationally 
underserved areas such as nontraditional and rural, but limits participation in some 
parts of the world because of connectivity. It is more convenient to work asynchronously 
as a group online than it is in the real world where there are all sorts of scheduling 
issues to agree upon, but this makes some learners feel resistant to online group work. 
The online classroom helps learners feel protected by anonymity, but leaves little room 
for disengaged learners to “hide.” It fits net generation lifestyles and habits 
(synchronous conversations), but limits use by older people who are not familiar with 
technology. For some, the e-learning environment eases communication, but for others 
it makes the handling of conflict and controversy more difficult when there is a lack of 
verbal and nonverbal queues. Additionally, the online classroom develops the learners’ 
writing skills, but it favors fast typists and not necessarily the best learners. 
 



Global Partners in Education Journal                                                                                                  April 2012, Vol.2 No.1, pp. 42-56 

www.gpejournal.org                      ISSN 2163-758X 
 
 

49 

 

For instructors, the online classroom allows instructors to avoid anxiety over gaining and 
sustaining learners’ interest over the time slot, but generates anxiety over being 
unprepared. Instructors can retain the basic approach of an existing course when 
adapting it for online, but it takes a considerable amount of time (especially online 
lectures). The online classroom assists instructors in remembering learners’ names and 
to encourage every learner to participate, but it makes instructors uneasy over how to 
build community. 
 
For administrators, the online classroom relieves campus space issues and adds 
enrollments without the cost of new facilities, but induces pressure to produce new 
services. While e-learning generates new markets for institutions, some organizations 
remain skeptical about the credibility of an online education. The online classroom 
provides opportunities to experiment and share resources, but it causes academic 
libraries to be anxious about their role in teaching and learning. Finally, the e-learning 
environment improves institutional flexibility, but it restricts financial aid opportunities 
that may not be available for e-learners. 
 
Offering online programs will continue to assist educational institutions in becoming 
preferred providers and leading innovators in the area of e-learning. It is possible to 
organize for growth in infrastructure and programs, and to be a best practices institution 
that develops professional educators and invests in faculty development of scholar-
practitioners. Still, for schools to be characterized by online good practice will require 
administrators to understand that “the medium is not the message, but instead is an 
alternative way of communicating the message, that message being the content of what 
is being taught and learned” (Bender, 2003, p. 165). Administrators will also need to 
employ instructors who are energized about online teaching and learning, and have a 
desire to be educationally progressive (Bender, 2003).  
 
Technology is a compelling force that is transforming education. However, Paulson, 
Ed.D. Program Director at Bethel University, summarized the definitive purpose of e-
learning: “The issue isn’t the need for more technology, but using it in a way that 
enhances global relationships and learning.” In conclusion, the future of education is 
global. Providing a global education means learners are comfortable navigating the 
virtual world. They are also effective at solving problems alongside people from different 
cultures and perspectives.  

 
References 

 
Bender, T. (2003). Discussion-based online teaching to enhance student learning: 

Theory, practice, and assessment. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing. 
California Distance Learning Project. (2005). What is distance learning? Retrieved from 

http://www.cdlponline.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=whatis&pg=3 
Chickering, A., & Gamson, Z. (1991). Applying the seven principles of good practice for 

undergraduate education: New directions for teaching and learning. Hoboken, 
NJ: Jossey-Bass. 

http://www.cdlponline.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=whatis&pg=3


Global Partners in Education Journal                                                                                                  April 2012, Vol.2 No.1, pp. 42-56 

www.gpejournal.org                      ISSN 2163-758X 
 
 

50 

 

Collison, G., Elbaum, B., Haavind, S., & Tinker, R. (2000). Facilitating online learning: 
Effective strategies for moderators. Madison, WI: Atwood Publishing. 

Crews, K. D. (2003). Copyright and distance education: Making sense of the TEACH 
Act. Change, 35, 34-39.  

Dewey, J. (1938). Logic: The theory of inquiry. New York, NY: Holt. 
Glatthorn, A. A. (2000). The principal as curriculum leader (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, 

CA: Corwin Press. 
Herrington, J., Reeves, T. C., & Oliver, R. (2010). A guide to authentic e-learning: 

Connecting with e-learning. New York, NY: Routledge. 
King, A. (1993). From sage on the stage to guide on the side. College Teaching, 41, 30-

35.  
Ko, S., & Rossen, S. (2004). Teaching online: A practical guide (2nd ed.). New York: 

Houghton Mifflin. 
Lucas, S. R. (2001). Assessment of learning outcomes in an online environment. 

Academic Exchange Quarterly, 5, 63-69. Retrieved from 
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Assessment of learning outcomes in an online 
environment.-a083034552 

Ruhleder, K., & Twidale, M. (2000). Reflective collaborative learning on the web: 
Drawing on the masterclass. First Monday, 5(1). Retrieved from 
http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/742/651 

Shaw, M. H., & Shaw, B. B. (2003). Copyright in the age of photocopies, word 
processors, and the internet. Change, 35, 20-27.  

Shelton, K., & Saltsman, G. (2005). An administrator’s guide to online education. 
Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing, Inc. 

Temares, M. L. (2005). AskTheStudents.com: 4 views from the front line. The Chronicle 
of Higher Education, 52, B15-B18. Retrieved from 

 http://chronicle.com/article/AskTheStudentscom-4-Views/31973/ 
Woolley, D. R. (1994). PLATO: The emergence of the online community. Retrieved from 

http://thinkofit.com/plato/dwplato.htm 
Zemsky, R. (2007). E-learning: Successes and failures. The Chronicle of Higher 

Education, 53, B20-B23. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/E-Learning-
Successes-and/33193/ 

 

  

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Assessment%20of%20learning%20outcomes%20in%20an%20online%20environment.-a083034552
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Assessment%20of%20learning%20outcomes%20in%20an%20online%20environment.-a083034552
http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/742/651
http://chronicle.com/article/AskTheStudentscom-4-Views/31973/
http://thinkofit.com/plato/dwplato.htm
http://chronicle.com/article/E-Learning-Successes-and/33193/
http://chronicle.com/article/E-Learning-Successes-and/33193/


Global Partners in Education Journal                                                                                                  April 2012, Vol.2 No.1, pp. 42-56 

www.gpejournal.org                      ISSN 2163-758X 
 
 

51 

 

Appendix A 

 
Potential Benefits of the E-Learning Paradigm 

 

Benefits 

Benefits for Learners 

 Facilitates discussion, particularly in humanities, social sciences, and writing 
courses 

 Allows adult learners to balance family, work (especially those who travel), and 
education 

 Is appreciated by adult learners who desire more equality between the instructor 
and learner 

 Emphasizes learner collaboration and deemphasizes the traditional role of the 
instructor 

 Encourages contact between learners and faculty 

 Develops reciprocity and cooperation among learners 

 Makes assignments conducive to active learning 

 Provides channel for prompt feedback 

 Emphasizes time on task 

 Shows respect for diverse talents and ways of learning 

 Provides global access to learning 

 Fosters critical reflection and individual and collaborative learning that rivals, and 
may even exceed, traditional settings for instruction 

 Accommodates different learning styles through interactive media delivered via 
the internet 

 Allows access to another culture on its own terms 

 Provides capability to better serve learners from educationally underserved areas 
such as nontraditional, rural, and other learners 

 Promotes higher-order thinking 

 Encourages learners to gain new knowledge and skills that build on ideas 
connected to the real world 

 Offers convenience and freedom in when, where, and how the course is 
delivered, as well as the opportunity to offer specialized and advanced degrees 

 Overcomes the limits of place and time 

 Allows phases of learning (experience, reflection, conceptualization, and 
planning) to occur in different and perhaps more authentic environments 

 Challenges online courses to be project-based, requiring the learner to find, 
analyze, and synthesize materials found on the web, or to extrapolate meaning 
and conclusions from readings, discussion questions, and cohort members 

 Enables learners to construct their own knowledge 

 Accesses knowledge that is used in solving open-ended, contextualized 
problems 

 Facilitates interaction with people outside the U.S. 



Global Partners in Education Journal                                                                                                  April 2012, Vol.2 No.1, pp. 42-56 

www.gpejournal.org                      ISSN 2163-758X 
 
 

52 

 

 Extends and fosters critical reflection time 

 Provides an opportunity to compose thoughtful, probing contributions 

 Helps learners feel protected by anonymity 

 Lessens interruptions when formulating responses 

 Allows learners to respond when they feel inspired  

 Limits hierarchy in terms of gender and racial differences 

 Allows quiet learners to participate without being intimidated by domineering 
ones 

 Frees learners to concentrate on what is being communicated in posted lectures 

 Allows review of the material in its original form or catch up on material they 
missed because of illness or absence 

 Improves the flow of communication in the areas of counseling, advice, 
mentoring, and support with using online tools such as email and virtual office 
hours 

 Is more convenient to work asynchronously as a group online than it is in the real 
world, where there are all sorts of scheduling issues to agree upon 

 Suits interactive assignments such as role-playing 

 Relates education with experience 

 Appeals to nonlinear thinkers 

 Engages learners in online chat, which is familiar and easy for learners who are 
used to instant messaging 

 Fits net generation lifestyles and habits (synchronous conversations) 

 Focuses on collaboration 

 Gives learners the opportunity to benefit from the successes and mistakes of 
fellow learners 

 Allows an opportunity to learn by doing rather than in the abstract 

 Eases communication for some learners 

 Attracts learners who are more motivated 

 Leads to fewer distractions and fosters a greater ability to concentrate purely on 
the connections of thoughts and concepts when not making use of all five senses 

 Allows easy access to vast resources through hyperlinks for comparison or 
research and online reference material 

 Eliminates the artificial learning environment as a result of scheduled time for 
learning to take place 

 Enables learners to work at their own pace and to log on when they are ready to 
learn 

 Encourages learners to delve more deeply into issues  

 Facilitates more personal attention 

 Allows diversity of learning opportunities that each medium provides 

 Increases the opportunity for continued thought, reflection, and meta cognition 
because resources are available throughout the duration of the course 

 Develops writing skills 

 Develops skills of collaboration and interaction with others, despite the distance, 



Global Partners in Education Journal                                                                                                  April 2012, Vol.2 No.1, pp. 42-56 

www.gpejournal.org                      ISSN 2163-758X 
 
 

53 

 

permitting learners to work meaningfully from a remote location 

 Allows time for new ideas, thoughts, and important connections to be made and 
communicated because the act of writing is slower than speaking 

 Makes it essential that valid methods for assessment be determined by the 
instructor and/or institution, and communicated to the learner at the outset of the 
program 

 Enables learners to “listen” only to what is helpful or interesting to the learner 

 Learners can participate in their pajamas  

 

Benefits for Instructors 

 Assists in communicating high expectations 

 Helps instructors engage in a lengthier debate and to better challenge ideas 
when the perception of the online instructor is less formal (guide on the side) 

 Allows instructors to retain the basic approach for an existing face-to-face course 

 Prompts instructors to reevaluate older and possibly out of date course materials, 
improve organization and coherence, and increase comprehension when 
adapting a face-to-face course to online 

 Allows instructors to avoid anxiety over gaining and sustaining learners’ interest 
over the time slot 

 Assists instructors in remembering learners’ names 

 Eliminates the need for room set-up  

 Helps instructors avoid looking stupid or blanking out 

 Removes concerns about wearing comfortable clothing and shoes 

 Reduces the need to respond when lacking inspiration 

 Eliminates travel time to and from class  

 Eliminates the need to find a parking space 

 Benefits for Administrators 

 Relieves campus space issues 

 Provides better access to certain faculty members which helps dislodge 
bottlenecks for required courses 

 Improves institutional flexibility 

 Adds enrollments without the cost of new facilities 

 Generates new markets for institutions  

 Promotes risk-taking  

 Provides opportunity to experiment and share resources 

 
  



Global Partners in Education Journal                                                                                                  April 2012, Vol.2 No.1, pp. 42-56 

www.gpejournal.org                      ISSN 2163-758X 
 
 

54 

 

Appendix B 
 

Potential Challenges of the E-Learning Paradigm 
 

Challenges 

Challenges for Learners 

 Makes some learners feel resistant to online group work, being unable to 
conceptualize it 

 Lacks engagement of all five senses 

 Causes newcomers to online teaching and learning to exaggerate the computer 
expertise and infrastructure required 

 Builds expectations for safe and convenient access (high-speed wireless 
available across campus and virus protection) 

 Creates disappointment when institutions are not able to provide the level of 
support to which think they are entitled 

 Triggers expectations for access to software to complement course work 

 Increases expectations for 24-hour labs and assistance 

 Leads to desire for electronic access to professor ratings 

 Raises hope for more social networking software 

 Produces desire for more of an interactive learning environment 

 Increases expectations for professors to be responsive and engaging for all 
learning styles 

 Requires learners to be more responsible (illegal file sharing and tying up the 
network) 

 Affects various disciplines or fields of study differently 

 Brings challenges to online cross-cultural exchanges in the area of language of 
instruction (including the textbook) 

 Requires an understanding of cultural patterns of learning 

 Requires an understanding of differing guidelines regarding writing 

 Requires an understanding of rules about plagiarism and originality 

 Triggers a variety of ideas about time and frequency of communication 

 Limits real-time activities because of differing time zones 

 Leads to frustration when internet access is limited and phone connections are 
unstable in some countries 

 Makes it more important to observe different religious and secular holidays 

 Favors fast typists, not necessarily the best learners (synchronous online 
conversations) 

 Feels hectic and disjointed as several conversations can be going on at the 
same time (synchronous online conversations) 

 Requires synchronous messages to be short; there is little chance to correct 
spelling and grammar mistakes 

 Makes it difficult to allow time for silence, for a reflective environment, and 
learning in depth (synchronous online conversations) 



Global Partners in Education Journal                                                                                                  April 2012, Vol.2 No.1, pp. 42-56 

www.gpejournal.org                      ISSN 2163-758X 
 
 

55 

 

 Produces extra challenges for disabled learners 

 Discourages socialization opportunities in person  

 Requires more academic support to help learners succeed 

 Limits use by older learners who are not familiar with technology 

 Creates more intellectual property issues and security issues 

 Affects learners’ motivation if they use the computer at work; they do not always 
feel like working on the computer when they get home 

 Constrains communication when learners cannot see people’s faces and what 
they look like (unless using Skype, Google video chat, or a roster with photos) 

 Makes the handling of conflict and controversy more difficult when there is a lack 
of verbal and nonverbal queues 

 Requires more time to engage in an online conversation 

 Makes it difficult to establish boundaries, especially if learners are not self-
motivated 

 Influences learners’ level of accountability in being prepared for class 

 Limits participation in some parts of the world without internet connectivity 

 Leaves little room for disengaged learners to “hide” 

 

Challenges for Instructors 

 Makes it necessary to teach learners that information on the web is of variable 
quality because there are no standards of control as to what is posted 

 Takes a considerable amount of time to adapt a face-to-face course for online 
initially, especially online lectures 

 Curbs a professor’s ability to communicate passion for his or her subject 

 Increases work for faculty members 

 Involves teaching learners with varying levels of technology expertise 

 Ties instructors to the computer (lacking boundaries)  

 Creates anxiety over knowing less about technology than the learners do 

 Increases fear over losing command of the class 

 Triggers concern over making sure tone/personality is coming through 

 Creates apprehension over engaging all learners 

 Generates anxiety over being unprepared 

 Makes instructors uneasy over how to build community 

 Causes anxiety over not being able to meet the same outcomes when adapting a 
face-to-face course to an online course 

 

Challenges for Administrators 

 Forces administrators to deal with the perception that online learning 
discourages active learning 

 Restricts financial aid opportunities that may not be available for e-learners 

 Makes some organizations skeptical about the credibility of an online education 
and favor hiring people with face-to-face degrees 

 Hurts a school’s reputation if it is offering an online degree program that is not 



Global Partners in Education Journal                                                                                                  April 2012, Vol.2 No.1, pp. 42-56 

www.gpejournal.org                      ISSN 2163-758X 
 
 

56 

 

accredited  

 Causes academic libraries to be anxious about their role in teaching and learning 

 Creates the need to expand entrepreneurial roles 

 Induces pressure to produce new services 

 
 
 

About the Author 

 
Cheryl Bostrom teaches in the Graduate School at Bethel University. She holds a 
Doctor of Education in Educational Administration degree and studied abroad in Turkey 
to complete her dissertation titled, Diffusion of Internationalization in Turkish Higher 
Education: A Comparative Case Study at Ankara University and Gazi University. Her 
work was published in the Journal of Studies in International Education. Cheryl has a K-
12 Principal License, a Master of Arts in Communication degree with an emphasis in 
intercultural communication, and a Master’s Certificate in Teaching English as a Foreign 
Language. Cheryl also has first-hand experience in 19 countries outside the United 
States. Her core beliefs and values include a commitment to building trust with people 
of different cultures and internationalizing postsecondary education.  She can be 
reached at c-bostrom@bethel.edu.  
 

mailto:c-bostrom@bethel.edu

