Time over motivation

Comparison of the engagement and completion of synchronous and asynchronous online courses for adult learners

Intro

  • Matthew Gemmell (he/him)
  • Microbiology background
  • CGR (UoL) & NEOF
  • Bioinformatics trainer
    • Since 2015
    • 10-15 workshop p/a
    • > 65 workshops

Contents

  • Review and investigation of best approaches

    • PGCAP

  • Online courses

  • Synchronous vs asynchronous approaches

  • Bioinformatics

  • Working adult academics

Background

Online courses

  • Online/networked/E-learning: IT used to promote connections
    • Learners
    • Leaner & tutor
    • Learning community & learning resources
    • (Goodyear et al, 2005)
  • Now commonplace

Synchronous and asynchronous

  • Synchronous
    • Interacting parties are present at the same time
    • E.g. Presentations and practical walkthroughs
  • Asynchronous
    • interacting parties are not present at the same time
    • E.g. recordings and materials learners can work through at their own time
  • Advantages and disadvantages to each

Previous comparisons of synchronous and asynchronous

  • Some studies shown no to very little difference in learning outcome
    • (Olson & McCracken 2015, Shahabadi et al, 2015)
  • Study of students learning word processing (Ogbonna et al, 2019)
    • Both increased cognitive academic achievement
    • Asynchronous approaches showed higher cognitive achievement

Teaching context

  • Many different teaching approaches
  • Best to adopt good practices and avoid poor practices (Race, 2019)
  • Choice is based on
    • Suitability with tutor
    • Topic
    • Learners
    • More

Bioinformatics (bfx)

  • Multi disciplinary topic
    • Genomics, Computer science, & Statistics
  • 2 main types of bfx learners
    • Life scientists
    • Computational background
  • I primarily teach life scientists
    • Assume basic level of biology
    • Can’t gain benefit of interaction with computational-based learners

Master as a Service

  • Approach for multi disciplinary topics
  • Partner learners from different backgrounds
  • Initial reluctance by students
  • End point:
    • Students highly satisfied
    • Benefited from learning skills and knowledge of students from other backgrounds
  • (Navarro et al, 2019)

Working academic adults

  • PhD students, ECRs
  • Abundance of motivation
    • Want and/or need to learn (Taylor & Hamdy, 2013)
    • Know what they need to learn (Kara et al, 2019)
  • Low in time
    • Full time jobs, Household tasks, & Caring responsibilities (children/dependants) (Cercone, 2008)

Case study

  • Literature review

  • Survey

    • Likert scaled questions
    • Open questions

  • Online courses

  • Synchronous and asynchronous

  • Engagement & completion

  • Advantages and disadvantages

Survey

  • Google form
  • Ethics disclaimer and collective ethics approval form
  • University of Liverpool staff (8 responses)

Engagement and completion

Course attendance and engagement

Breakdown

Synchronous course attendance Asynchronous course attendance Synchronous course engagement Asynchronous course engagement
1-2 1-2 4 4
1-2 1-2 4 2
1-2 1-2 4 2
1-2 1-2 2 4
3-5 3-5 5 3
1-2 1-2 4 4
1-2 1-2 5 4
5+ 3-5 5 3

Engagement

  • More likely to engage and complete synchronous courses
  • Dropouts are a crucial problem of adult learning (Park & Choi, 2009, Choi & Kim, 2018)
  • Studies have found limited engagement in pre-class materials in higher education (Al-Zahrani, 2015)

Synchronous courses

Synchronous advantages

How beneficial do you find:

Blocked out time

  • Response with highest perceived benefit
  • All responses extremely beneficial (bar one beneficial)
  • Easier to get break when event in calendar
  • Low time, especially:
    • middle-aged adults (36-55)
    • female learners who are married and have children
    • (Selwyn, 2011, Kara et al, 2019)

Synchronous advantages

How beneficial do you find:

Learner-learner interaction

  • Mixed response
    • 5 beneficial
    • 3 unbeneficial
    • No neutrals
  • Discussion with fellow learners
    • Share struggles and solutions
  • Distraction from course
    • Zoom quiet room

Learner community

  • Immediate peer interaction promotes learning
    • Learners assist and encourage (Dao et al, 2022, Philp et al, 2013)
  • Synchronous learning can create a community
    • Prevent feelings of isolation and separation (Öztürk, 2021)
  • Adult learners find it difficult to develop social bonds with other learners online (Furnborough, 2012; Zhang & Krug, 2012)

Synchronous advantages

How beneficial do you find:

Tutor access

  • Primarily beneficial
  • Prompt feedback is good practice
    • Expected by students (Johnson, 2014)
  • Correct tutor interactions with learners
    • Promotes deep learning approach (Hardman, 2016)

Troubleshooting/debugging

  • Bfx involves coding and programming
  • Typos, mistakes, and errors
  • Strong negative emotions
    • Confusion, frustration, & anger
    • Rapid demotivation
    • (Kinnunen & Simon, 2010)
  • Most bfx tools are open source
    • Significant barrier to entry
    • (Ngo et al, 2021)

Tutor assitance

  • Bfx benefits from immediate help
  • Resolve issues & encouragement
  • Teach troubleshooting skill
    • Skills are vital (Li et al, 2019)
  • Study (Whalley et al, 2021)
    • Formal education
    • Computational troubleshooting
    • Students valued taught skills

Ineffective tutor interaaction

  • Limited interaction
  • Late or no response
  • Poor feedback
  • Lack of synchronous assistance
  • (Joo, 2014; Dumais et al, 2013; Dzakiria, 2012; Östlund, 2005; Pierrakeas et al, 2004)

Synchronous course timing

  • Best timing is 10am - 4pm
  • Allows adults time for other responsibilities
  • Prevent cognitive overload
    • Less energy
    • Our learners typically leave between 3pm and 4pm

Day break

  • Online course allows a day break
  • Low perceived benefit
  • Beneficial to tutors
    • Recharge energy levels & fix any issues

Synchronous open question

Question: Are there any other features of synchronous online courses you find particularly beneficial? Do you have any other comments about synchronous online courses?

While I see better engagement in synchronous courses, I get even more so with those in-person as opposed to online. For example, more likely to ask for help/questions at in-person courses as opposed to online.
Having someone be able to explain why something works/doesn’t work
If the cohort is small, of a similar level of understanding and feel comfortable to engage, it’s a great learning environment.
The limited time-frame does force more attention and so internalisation of knowledge vs more asynchronous work. The latter is more passive and easier to lose focus.

Takeaways from synchronous open question

  • Two voiced preference for synchronous courses over asynchronous
  • One preference for in-person courses
  • Good structure and environment is vital
    • Keep learners focussed
    • Open for questions and assistance
    • Many practices to attempt this

Bioinformatics is difficult

  • Multidisciplinary topics are difficult
    • Lots of unfamiliar skills
    • Multiple concepts interacting at once
  • Asynchronous courses better suited to less complex foundational topics (Sindiani et al, 2020)
    • Work at their own pace
    • More time to focus on synchronous classes of more complex topics

Fast evolution of bioinformatics

  • Constant improvements
    • Sequencing approaches and technologies
    • Databases size and completeness
    • New and existing tools
  • Difficult for teaching programs & technical experts to keep pace (Navarro et al, 2019)
  • Materials need to be updated regularly
    • Synchronous courses don’t need to re-record videos

Asynchronous courses

Asynchronous advanatages

How beneficial do you find:

Own time

  • Slight benefit
    • Lower than blocked out time
  • Previous research
    • Benefit in learners working at own pace and time
    • (Akuratiya & Meddage, 2020, Clark et al, 2011, Coogle & Floyd, 2015)

Recorded lectures

  • Very beneficial
  • Instant access to E-materials and online lectures are beneficial to learning (Ayu, 2020).
    • Future use
  • Asynchronous courses do not require a stable Internet
    • Issue of online synchronous courses (Woodcock, 2023).
  • Didn’t specify pre recorded lectures or recordings of attended lectures

Asynchronous open question

Are there any other features of asynchronous online courses you find particularly beneficial? Do you have any other comments about asynchronous online courses?

It is nice to be able to do at your own pace. I do find though I’m more likely to drop off a course like this instead of follow through to completion. I’ll sometimes look through asynchronous material to find answers to a specific question or issue I have, as opposed to do the whole course, which is probably worse for general understanding of a topic
Being able to skip/skim things I understand better to focus on things I’m struggling with

  • Benefit: Asynchronous course are “lower pressure”, it’s reassuring to know one can reapproach topics and problems another day if unable to engage with them optimally today.

  • Re-listening/watching recorded content helps A and A&V learners.

  • Personal Observation: Flexibillity to learn works best when paired with some limits,

  • Mine are to record lessons and notes and reattempts at solving problems, learn why mistakes in code happen, let someone who values your education know a plan for learning.
It is difficult to find time and when you find time it may be difficult to progress if you need to wait for support
Good structure and progression of the course is important

Takeaways from asynchronous open question

  • Structure important and
  • Limitations are required
  • Asynchronous course as a resource
    • Overcome issues
    • Find specific tools and knowledge
  • Lack of support is an important detriment
  • Self-paced and individual approach can be a boon

Further comments

“Do you have any further comments or feedback?”

  • None, best of luck with PGCAP research

Conclusions

Combining approaches

  • Best method
  • Many students are in favour of a blended approach
    • (Perveen, 2016, Xie et al, 2018)
  • Disadvantages of one approach compensated by the other

Flipped classroom

  • Class is at home
  • Homework is in the classroom
  • Improves performance in learning
  • (Akçayır & Akçayır, 2018, Strelan et al, 2020).

Our synchronous approaches

  • 10am - 4pm
  • Tuesday & Thursday
  • Lectures during course
  • Materials at own pace
    • Theory, practice, & exercises
  • Welcoming environment
    • Tutor access & learner community
  • Flexibility
  • More traditional approach for tutor

Our asynchronous approaches

  • Prerequisite materials (e.g. Linux)
  • Post course materials
    • Course materials
    • Files & installation instructions
    • Recorded lectures
    • Further resources

Recap

  • Synchronous and asynchronous
    • Different advantages and disadvantages
  • Bioinformatics
    • Multidisciplinary, difficult, & rapidly changing
  • Working academic adults
    • High motivation
    • Low time: Need scheduled event
  • Consider tutors, topic, and the learners

Thanks! & Thanks to:

  • NEOF training subgroup
  • PGCAP coordinators & teachers
  • CGR

Questions?

Links

Main website: https://m-gemmell.github.io/

Slides: https://m-gemmell.github.io/PGCAP

Survey & Ethics disclaimer

Survey to compare benefits of Synchronous and Asynchronous bioinformatics online workshops

If you are a PhD student or staff member of the University of Liverpool I would appreciate you filling out the below survey. This is to carry out my scholarly research for my PGCAP (https://www.liverpool.ac.uk/eddev/supporting-teaching/pgcap/).

Definitions: Synchronous: Interacting parties present at same time. I.e. the instructors and students gather at the same time and place (virtual or physical). Asynchronous: Interacting parties not present at same time. I.e. the students work at their own time and place separate to the instructors. Ethic disclaimer You are being asked to participate in a research study that aims to to compare benefits of Synchronous and Asynchronous online workshops. As a part of the study, you will be asked to answer the questionnaire. Your participation is completely voluntary. Completing the questionnaire should take ~10 minutes. Rest assured that you can stop participating at any time and your answers to the survey will be kept anonymous and confidential. Emails will not be captured for this survey. Note: A collective ethics approval has been carried out for this survey for University of Liverpool students and staff. Please do not hesitate to contact Matthew Gemmell (mgemmell@liverpool.ac.uk) if you have any questions about the project or the survey.

Citations

  • Akçayır, G., & Akçayır, M. (2018). The flipped classroom: A review of its advantages and challenges. Computers & Education, 126, 334-345.

  • Akuratiya, D. A., & Meddage, D. N. (2020). Students’ perception of online learning during COVID-19 pandemic: A survey study of IT students. Tablet, 57(48), 23.

  • Al‐Zahrani, A. M. (2015). From passive to active: The impact of the flipped classroom through social learning platforms on higher education students’ creative thinking. British journal of educational technology, 46(6), 1133-1148.

  • Ayu, M. (2020). Online learning: Leading e-learning at higher education. The Journal of English Literacy Education: The Teaching and Learning of English as a Foreign Language, 7(1), 47-54.

  • Cercone, K. (2008). Characteristics of adult learners with implications for online learning design. AACE review (formerly AACE Journal), 16(2), 137-159.

  • Choi, H. J., & Kim, B. U. (2018). Factors affecting adult student dropout rates in the Korean cyber-university degree programs. The Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 66(1), 1-12.

  • Clark, R. C., Nguyen, F., & Sweller, J. (2011). Efficiency in learning: Evidence-based guidelines to manage cognitive load. John Wiley & Sons.

  • Coogle, C., & Floyd, K. (2015). Synchronous and asynchronous learning environments of rural graduate early childhood special educators utilizing Wimba© and Ecampus. Journal of Online Learning & Teaching, 11(2).

  • Dao, P., Hoang, S. T. T., & Chi Nguyen, M. X. N. (2022). Young learners’ synchronous online peer interaction: teachers’ beliefs of its benefits and implementation. Language Awareness, 1-25.

  • Dumais, S. A., Rizzuto, T. E., Cleary, J., & Dowden, L. (2013). Stressors and supports for adult online learners: Comparing first-and continuing-generation college students. American Journal of Distance Education, 27(2), 100-110.

  • Dzakiria, H. (2012). Illuminating the Importance of Learning Interaction to Open Distance Learning (ODL) Success: A Qualitative Perspectives of Adult Learners in Perlis, Malaysia. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning.

  • Furnborough, C. (2012). Making the most of others: autonomous interdependence in adult beginner distance language learners. Distance Education, 33(1), 99-116.

  • Goodyear, P., Jones, C., Asensio, M., Hodgson, V., & Steeples, C. (2005). Networked learning in higher education: Students’ expectations and experiences. Higher Education, 50, 473-508.

  • Hardman, J. (2016). Tutor–student interaction in seminar teaching: Implications for professional development. Active Learning in Higher Education, 17(1), 63-76.

  • Johnson, S. (2014). Applying the Seven Principles of Good Practice: Technology as a Lever-in an Online Research Course. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 13(2).

  • Joo, K. P. (2014). A cultural-historical activity theory investigation of contradictions in open and distance higher education among alienated adult learners in Korea National Open University. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 15(1), 41-61.

  • Kara, M., Erdogdu, F., Kokoç, M., & Cagiltay, K. (2019). Challenges faced by adult learners in online distance education: A literature review. Open Praxis, 11(1), 5-22.

  • Kinnunen, P., & Simon, B. (2010, August). Experiencing programming assignments in CS1: the emotional toll. In Proceedings of the Sixth international workshop on Computing education research (pp. 77-86).

  • Li, C., Chan, E., Denny, P., Luxton-Reilly, A., & Tempero, E. (2019, January). Towards a framework for teaching debugging. In Proceedings of the Twenty-First Australasian Computing Education Conference (pp. 79-86).

  • Navarro, J., Zaballos, A., Fonseca, D., & Torres-Kompen, R. (2019, October). Master as a Service: A multidisciplinary approach to Big Data teaching. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Technological Ecosystems for Enhancing Multiculturality (pp. 534-538).

  • Ngo, C. J., Chang, J., & Chung, S. (2021). Decreasing the Barrier to Entry for an Open-Source Full-Stack Web Development. In Proceedings of the Conference on Information Systems Applied Research ISSN (Vol. 2167, p. 1508).

  • Ogbonna, C. G., Ibezim, N. E., & Obi, C. A. (2019). Synchronous versus asynchronous e-learning in teaching word processing: An experimental approach. South African Journal of Education, 39(2), 1-15.

  • Olson, J. S., & McCracken, F. E. (2015). Is it worth the effort? The impact of incorporating synchronous lectures into an online course. Online Learning, 19(2), n2.

  • Östlund, B. (2005). Stress, disruption and community-Adult learners’ experiences of obstacles and opportunities in distance education. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-learning, 8(1).

  • Öztürk, M. (2021). Asynchronous online learning experiences of students in pandemic process: Facilities, challenges, suggestions. Turkish Online Journal of Qualitative Inquiry, 12(2), 173-200.

  • Park, J. H., & Choi, H. J. (2009). Factors influencing adult learners’ decision to drop out or persist in online learning. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 12(4), 207-217.

  • Perveen, A. (2016). Synchronous and asynchronous e-language learning: A case study of virtual university of Pakistan. Open Praxis, 8(1), 21-39.

  • Philp, J., Adams, R., & Iwashita, N. (2013). Peer interaction and second language learning. Routledge.

  • Pierrakeas, C., Xenos, M., Panagiotakopoulos, C., & Vergidis, D. (2004). A comparative study of dropout rates and causes for two different distance education courses. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 5(2), 1-15.

  • Race, P. (2019). The lecturer’s toolkit: a practical guide to assessment, learning and teaching. Routledge.

  • Selwyn, N. (2011). ‘Finding an appropriate fit for me’: Examining the (in) flexibilities of international distance learning. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 30(3), 367-383.

  • Shahabadi, M. M., & Uplane, M. (2015). Synchronous and asynchronous e-learning styles and academic performance of e-learners. Procedia-Social and behavioral sciences, 176, 129-138.

  • Sindiani, A. M., Obeidat, N., Alshdaifat, E., Elsalem, L., Alwani, M. M., Rawashdeh, H., … & Tawalbeh, L. I. (2020). Distance education during the COVID-19 outbreak: A cross-sectional study among medical students in North of Jordan. Annals of medicine and surgery, 59, 186-194.

  • Strelan, P., Osborn, A., & Palmer, E. (2020). The flipped classroom: A meta-analysis of effects on student performance across disciplines and education levels. Educational Research Review, 30, 100314.

  • Taylor, D. C., & Hamdy, H. (2013). Adult learning theories: implications for learning and teaching in medical education: AMEE Guide No. 83. Medical teacher, 35(11), e1561-e1572.

  • Whalley, J., Settle, A., & Luxton-Reilly, A. (2021, March). Novice reflections on debugging. In Proceedings of the 52nd ACM technical symposium on computer science education (pp. 73-79).

  • Woodcock, S. (2023). The merits and pitfalls of small group teaching online for undergraduate student doctors: A student perspective. Developing Academic Practice, 2023(Special), 131-139.

  • Xie, H., Liu, W., & Bhairma, J. (2018, December). Analysis of synchronous and asynchronous E-learning environments. In 2018 3rd Joint International Information Technology, Mechanical and Electronic Engineering Conference (JIMEC 2018) (pp. 270-274). Atlantis Press.

  • Zhang, Z., & Krug, D. (2012). Virtual educational spaces: Adult learners’ cultural conditions and practices in an online learning environment. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 9(7), 3-12.