When schools and programs shifted to online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic, we all got a closer look at what distance education really means—both the good parts and the not-so-good ones. Thinking back on my experiences as both a teacher and a student, I’ve had moments where online learning worked and others where it needed improvement. Based on what I learned from Teaching and Learning at a Distance by Simonson, Zvacek, and Smaldino (2023), here’s a look at one strong experience and one that could have been better, plus a few takeaways on how to make future online learning better.
A Positive Distance Learning Experience: Structure + Support = Success
One of my best online learning experiences was a graduate-level course that combined clear instructions with helpful teacher support. Each week had a well-organized module, and the expectations were easy to understand. The teacher stayed active in the course by posting updates, responding in discussions, and giving quick feedback. Simonson et al. (2023) explain that these are key parts of good online teaching. The goal isn't to copy what happens in a classroom but to make sure students are getting the same quality of learning, even if the format is different (p. 40). This course also had a mix of self-paced work and live check-ins, which helped build a strong sense of community—something that’s very important in distance education (Simonson et al., 2023, p. 51).
Research also supports this. When teachers use different ways to keep students engaged, students are more likely to enjoy the class and do well (Martin & Bolliger, 2018). This course was a great example of that.
A Distance Learning Experience That Needed Work
On the other hand, I once had to complete an online training that felt boring and disconnected. It mostly included videos and short quizzes, with no real interaction or feedback. There was no sense of community, and it felt easy to lose interest. Simonson et al. (2023) talk about something called the Interaction Equivalency Theorem, which says that learning happens best when at least one kind of interaction is strong—between students and the teacher, students and each other, or students and the content (p. 47). This training didn’t offer any of that.
How It Could Be Better
To improve that kind of course, I would suggest:
- Teacher Communication: Simple weekly updates or question sessions would help students feel more connected.
- Active Learning: Students could share their thoughts or apply what they learned through small projects or discussions instead of just watching videos.
- Build Community: Adding a group project or a message board could help students feel like they’re not alone.
Martin and Bolliger (2018) found that strong teacher presence, good conversations, and fast responses help students feel more engaged. With those changes, this training could have been much more effective and enjoyable.
How the Basics of Distance Learning Can Help
Chapters 1–4 of Teaching and Learning at a Distance remind us that successful online learning doesn’t just happen—it has to be planned carefully. Simonson et al. (2023) explain that classic learning theories like behaviorism and constructivism still matter, but they need to be used in ways that fit online settings (p. 27). For example, giving students real-world problems to solve or letting them work together online helps make the learning more meaningful.
Moore’s theory of transactional distance also reminds us that there needs to be a balance between structure and conversation (Simonson et al., 2023, p. 32). If there’s too much structure and not enough interaction, students can feel disconnected.
Distance learning can be powerful when done right. It’s not just about putting lessons online—it’s about thinking differently and making sure students are supported, engaged, and connected. The more we learn from what works (and what doesn’t), the better we can make the online learning experience for everyone.
.jpg)
References
Martin, F., & Bolliger, D. U. (2018). Engagement matters: Student perceptions on the importance of engagement strategies in the online learning environment. Online Learning, 22(1), 205–222. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v22i1.1092
Simonson, M., Zvacek, S., & Smaldino, S. (2023). Teaching and learning at a distance: Foundations of distance education (8th ed.). Information Age Publishing.
Hey Mena,
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed reading your reflection. I thought your point about the importance of flexibility in online learning was spot-on. Simonson and Zvacek (2024) talk about how distance education works best when it's designed to fit the learner’s schedule and environment, not just transfer a traditional classroom model online.
You also mentioned how engaging content made a big difference, which really stuck with me. Dixson (2015) backs that up, she found that students are more involved in online courses when there’s a mix of interaction, clear organization, and relevant content. It sounds like your positive experiences had all three.
Thanks for sharing your perspective, it gave me a few new ideas about what really makes online learning work!
References:
Dixson, M. D. (2015). Measuring student engagement in the online course: The Online Student Engagement scale (OSE). Online Learning, 19(4), 143–157. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v19i4.561
Simonson, M., & Zvacek, S. (2024). Teaching and learning at a distance: Foundations of distance education (8th ed.). Information Age Publishing.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHi Mena,
ReplyDeleteThank you for this truly insightful blog post. I really resonated with your point that “successful online learning doesn’t just happen—it has to be planned carefully,” especially when reflecting on your positive experience with a course that featured both clear structure and active teacher presence. That aligns closely with Simonson et al.’s (2023) emphasis on intentional design rather than simply transferring face-to-face instruction online (p. 40).
Your mention of Moore’s theory of transactional distance is also very formative. I appreciate how you connected this theory to your less effective training experience, noting how too much structure and not enough interaction created disengagement. This clearly shows how theory applies to practice.
To add to your point, it’s worth noting that the Community of Inquiry (CoI) framework by Garrison, Anderson, and Archer (2000) complements Moore’s theory well. They argue that meaningful online learning requires the intersection of teaching presence, social presence, and cognitive presence. Your positive experience reflects all three: clear guidance (teaching presence), engaging discussions (social presence), and active learning (cognitive presence). In contrast, your less effective training lacked these essential elements, which likely led to the “boring and disconnected” feeling you described.
Your blog post serves as a great example of reflecting on experience using theory, and I agree that when we learn from what works and what doesn’t, we can make distance education not just functional but transformative.
References:
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2-3), 87–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6
Simonson, M., Zvacek, S., & Smaldino, S. (2023). Teaching and learning at a distance: Foundations of distance education (8th ed.). Information Age Publishing.