Article Critique Administration Of Distance Education

Online Education and Best Practices for the Development of a Distance Education Program: Article Critique

In this article, Koptelov and Turner (2021) focused on the administration of online education, specifically the benefits and challenges of online teaching and learning, not to mention the details on the formation, implementation, and evaluation of courses. The primary focus was the best practices in developing a distance education program. Koptelov and Turner (2021) argue that online learning can be effective but is contingent on various factors. First, the authors acknowledge the level of significance online learning has gained over the past few decades and attribute this to factors such as convenience, financial considerations for colleges, and flexibility. Specifically, the authors argue that online education allows students to study at their own pace, manage various responsibilities, and help them build skills for the future.

Second, the authors consider whether online education can be classified as effective. To this, they respond that the answer cannot be simplified to a yes or no answer. Instead, they argue that the effectiveness of an online education program depends on several factors, including teachers' preparedness, the maturity and discipline of students, and the alignment of the teaching approach with the needs of learners. As such, the authors propose a nuanced perspective factoring in the context and the specific student and instructor characteristics. They assert that online teaching can be a viable option for institutions aiming to reach a broader student base, provided pedagogical guidelines and student-focused approaches are followed.

The author's premise is that online education can be an effective tool to enhance access to education when certain conditions are met. These conditions include having a motivated, disciplined, mature, and well-organized student base since no teacher is present to monitor their behavior. It also depends on how well the instructors are prepared and their commitment to the process. This is a logical premise based on earlier research findings showing that with the right structure, a focused learning management system, prioritization, and individual devotion, online education is viable.

The authors' position is relatively well supported. To test the validity of their assertions, the authors conducted a review of the literature where data was collected from articles on online learning and suggested strategies for student success. The cited articles supported the authors’ arguments by showing that when students feel supported by their instructors, they feel more motivated and work harder. The research also showed that students in an online learning platform perform generally better than those on a traditional face-to-face. In addition, the research supports the assertion that self-discipline, motivation to find solutions, and the ability to think critically helps students' outcomes. This research reports on an academically studied topic, and arguments are based on empirical results substantiating the argument.

Therefore, online education can be an effective tool to enhance education access when students are motivated, responsible, critical thinkers, and mature. It also depends on the commitment and preparation effort made by the instructors. Indeed, when these conditions are met, the course outcomes are met. Therefore, online education can promote education, especially when students have other commitments. However, the argument fails to consider other factors, such as the program's implementation and the learning management system. The focus on the aspects of instructors and students fails to encapsulate the nuances of online education administration fully. Nonetheless, what has been represented is accurate and well-supported by evidence.

Reference

Koptelov, A., & Turner, S. (2021). Online education and best practices for the development of a distance education program. SHS Web of Conferences, 98, 05009. https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/20219805009