ARTICLE IN PRESS

0742-051X/$ - s

doi:10.1016/j.ta

�Correspondfax: +1770 593

E-mail addr

Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (2008) 601–609

www.elsevier.com/locate/tate

Teacher education programmes delivered at a distance:An examination of distance student perceptions

Allan Younga,�, Chance W. Lewisb

aSchool of Education, Colorado State University, 20 Bunnie Trail, Ellenwood, GA 30294, USAbTexas A&M University, USA

Received 13 April 2006; received in revised form 23 February 2007; accepted 15 March 2007

Abstract

Recent technological developments have greatly influenced the ways American universities deliver educational course

offerings to students at a distance. The perception of pre-service teachers in distance education programmes is germane to

the planning and delivery of distance education courses in teacher education departments in the future. The results of this

American study revealed a differing perception between male and female students in the area of course structure, student/

teacher interaction, overall course satisfaction and peer interaction. As a result of this study, recommendations are

provided for teacher preparation programmes to improve distance education course offerings for prospective teachers in

the USA and implications for educators involved in teacher preparation internationally.

Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Keywords: Distance education; Teacher education; Teacher preparation; Pre-service teachers; Teacher recruitment; Pre-service teacher

satisfaction

1. Introduction

The education process is in a state of rapidchange. This change is paralleled by developmentsin technology. The development of technology isadvantageous in that it aids in making education ata distance more accessible to those who wouldotherwise not be able to take regular classes becauseof work demands, family pressures and physicaldistance. Given these developments, distance educa-tion seems to be the obvious educational choice fornon-traditional students, that is, ‘‘those over 25,

ee front matter Published by Elsevier Ltd.

te.2007.03.003

ing author. Tel.: +1770 783 2675;

4697.

ess: YALLAN20@GMAIL.COM (A. Young).

part-time, working, residing off campus’’ (East-mond, 1998, p. 33). Eastmond stated that theseindividuals are responding to the changing societyand work environment needs and are doing this forone of the following reasons: ‘‘(a) career develop-ment, (b) job security, (c) upward mobility, (d) re-careering, or (e) other professional and personalreasons’’ (p. 33).

Universities are looking at ways to increase theirenrollment and provide quality instruction toindividuals who fit the mold of being distancestudents, that is, people who are older andconstrained by time and space. Distance educationmakes education available to those individuals whoare best suited for this purpose. Several universitieshave used distance education as a major delivery

ARTICLE IN PRESSA. Young, C.W. Lewis / Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (2008) 601–609602

method for their curricular offerings. In somesituations, universities have become exclusive pro-viders of distance education in a variety of subjectareas (Blumenstyk, 1998).

The National Center for Education Statistics(NCES) (2002) reported that approximately 6% ofall instructional faculty have taught at least onedistance education class. The report further statedthat there is a trend in recruiting instructors (i.e.,adjunct and lecturers) to teach these courses. Whatis not clear is what percentage of these teachers arein the Schools, Colleges and Departments ofEducation (SCDE’s), since this might have an effecton the students in the teacher training departments.

Downs (1998) saw as priority the essence of‘‘informing educators and learners about thesystematic course instruction in distance education’’(p. 133), and strongly recommended that developingthe curriculum in teacher licensure programmes willaid in the accomplishment of such goals. Despite thepreponderance of research in distance education,little research has been done on the impact ofdistance education and teacher preparation. Re-search thus far has tested the effectiveness ofdistance using video-conferencing equipment andcomparing it with the traditional method of delivery(Thomerson, 1995). A recent meta-analysis ofdistance education research between 1991 and1999 indicated that the research covered areas ofinterest in distance education other than theproposed area of perception of teacher candidates(Allen, Bourhis, Burrell, & Mabry, 2002). Further,the study looked at levels of satisfaction of allresearch done utilizing various media in the distancelearning environment. Of the 21 works listed, onlythree indicated any reference to the computer asmedia of satisfaction. It is clear that research hasnot been conducted to determine the effectiveness ofpresent day distance technology on the perceptionsof pre-service teachers.

The use of technology as a means of conveyingcontent to those separated by time and space is ofutmost importance in situations where studentscannot physically be present and have other issuesthat prevent them from being present on campus.Like those pre-service teachers in developing coun-tries who were trained via correspondence and radiobroadcast, the opportunities are available in light ofdocumented teacher shortages to use the technologyto deliver education courses at a distance.

Once pre-service or in-service teachers are ex-posed to distance courses, they will become familiar

with the technology and nuances of distanceeducation and will be more prone to use it as adelivery pedagogy in their classrooms (Willis &Raines, 2001). Willis and Raines (2001) concludedthat technology is an important aspect of pre-serviceteacher education and a powerful impetus forchange. These authors also noted that the dangersof those teachers who do not embrace technologyand suggest that they will be unable to reach thepresent generation of students due to obsolescence.

2. Pre-service teachers and distance education

The research on pre-service students’ perceptiontends to address areas other than distance learning,for example, much research has been done abouthow the students feel about technology use (Jegede,Taplin, & Chan, 2000; Lin et al., 1999; Mowrer-Popiel & Pollard, 1994; Williams & Alawiye, 2001;Wong, 1990; Yildirim, 2000). A later study lookedat using technology in pre-service teacher super-vision (Sharpe & Byra, 1997). The focus on thesestudies was not how the students perceived distanceeducation but rather how they related to technol-ogy.

2.1. Perceptions of pre-service teachers toward

technology

A starting point for the discussion about percep-tions of pre-service students toward distance educa-tion is predicated on how they feel about thetechnology. Mowrer-Propiel and Pollard (1994), intheir study, indicated that 75 out of 96 students hadpositive attitudes toward the use of computers.These same students indicated that they neededmore instruction in the ways in which to integratethe computer into their classes. In an investigationthat looked at video-based pedagogy in a mathmethods class, Friel and Carboni (2000) found thatstudents who participated in the study moved to amore student centred approach. The video provideda common form of reflection.

One study that came particularly close to thepresent study was done by Thomerson (1995).However, Thomerson looked at only one distancemedium: videoconferencing. The study looked attraditional face-to-face methodology and comparedit with distance education. Pre-service teachereducation students compared the two methodolo-gies. Those involved in this study ranged in agefrom 19 to 58. Remote site average age was 35.6.

ARTICLE IN PRESSA. Young, C.W. Lewis / Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (2008) 601–609 603

The study found that traditional groups had higherratings than host and remote sites for clusters ofquestions regarding student–teacher interaction,overall enjoyment satisfaction and physical learningenvironment. Remote and host site distance learn-ing groups differed significantly from traditionalgroups in perceptions of the physical environment.In terms of overall course satisfaction and enjoy-ment of course, there was a statistically significantdifference between the remote site, host site, andtraditional students in respect to the satisfaction andenjoyment of distance courses. Thomerson’s (1995)research was appropriate at the time it was written;however, it now seems outdated since the focus wason the perception of pre-service teacher educationstudents that used teleconferencing video equip-ment. The study did not include information aboutpresent day distance education.

A later study at Kent State University supportedthe findings of several researchers (Thomerson,1995; Tiene, 2002). The study experimentation usedonline learning and video conferencing as a majordriver of distance education. The technology usedwas LearnLinc, ‘‘that integrated desktop videocon-ferencing, online chat, a digital whiteboard feature,polling software, Web access, screen captures andthe ability to transmit any commercial computerapplication across the network (Tiene, p. 18). Usingthis sophisticated multimedia video-conferencingequipment and the concept of distributed learning,it was found that overall the students believed thatvideo conferencing was important and helpful,especially at remote sites. The study also providedsome insight as to issues that may be considered inthe future. One such issue was that of classdiscussions. It was agreed that this form of distancelearning tended to be less spontaneous than thetraditional classroom setting. The use of e-mail wasan important aspect of this form of distanceeducation because it leads to efficient submissionof assignments and evaluation. It was discoveredthroughout this study that students at the remotesite rated the delivery higher than those at the hostsite.

Another study which reflected on attitudes ofdistance education students and traditional studentsfound that those at the distance site were more likelyto be motivated and take another course offered at adistance (Bisciglia & Monk-Turner, 2002). Thisseems to conflict with the results of other studiessince traditionally there were issues relating tobreakdown of equipment and clarity of transmis-

sion to the remote site in earlier studies. Missingfrom the Thomerson study (1995) is the perceptionof teacher education students regarding distanceeducation in its present form. Teacher educators’perception is important since they will be teachingthe students of tomorrow. In a study by Andersonand Kent (2002), the focus on student satisfactionpresented an interesting twist. The research aboutstudent satisfaction levels with interactive televisedcourses concluded that students had difficulty inmaking the separation between the effectiveness ofthe delivery method and the technology. Anotherinteresting finding was that students actually ratedprofessors lower when interactive televised courseswere used. This seems to conflict with results ofsome of the previous studies.

Research is abundant in the area of teachereducation and distance education as separateentities; however, research is limited on pre-serviceteacher education students’ perceptions of distanceeducation (Hallinan & Khmelkov, 2001; Jegede,Taplin, & Chan, 2000; Yelland, Grieshaber, &Stokes, 2000; Yildirim, 2000). Therefore, the pur-pose of this research is to uncover the perceptions ofteacher candidates exposed to distance educationcourses in teacher education departments of selectedteacher education institutions.

3. Methodology

The primary purpose of this research was toexplore pre-service teachers’ perceptions of theeffectiveness of courses and programmes deliveredat a distance. This study comprises a sample of 92pre-service teachers at seven universities in theUnited States. These seven institutions were a goodbenchmark to conduct this study each had receivedPreparing Tomorrow’s Teachers to Use Technology(PT3) grants from the United States Department ofEducation. Also, each of these institutions had pre-service teacher preparation programmes that weredelivered at a distance. In 2004, after receivingapproval to conduct this research study in eachuniversity, university representatives provided theresearchers with a list of names and mailingaddresses of pre-service teacher candidates whocompleted at least one distance course in theirteacher preparation programme. To increase theprobability of gaining completed responses fromparticipants, the researchers used three approachesto accomplish this task. First, the researcherscontacted a designee at each institution who was

ARTICLE IN PRESSA. Young, C.W. Lewis / Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (2008) 601–609604

willing to administer the survey during the partici-pants’ class session. After administration of thesurvey, the designee collected the survey and placedthem in a stamped, self-addressed envelope andreturned them to the researcher. Second, thedesignee at each institution e-mailed a copy of thesurvey to the participants that did not completethe survey in person. These designees sent thestamped, self-addressed envelopes to the partici-pants mailing address. Third, the researcherstraveled to each of the institutions for a secondround of administering of the survey with theassistance of the designee at the institution.

3.1. Instrumentation

The survey instrument used in this study wasderived from another study that explored distanceeducation students’ perceptions of their academicprogrammes (Thomerson, 1995). The original sur-vey, which was used in another American study, wasmodified with permission to gain insight andpertinent data focused specifically on pre-serviceteachers’ perceptions of their teacher preparationprogrammes delivered at a distance. The survey wasdivided into four major categories on a Likert scale:(a) effectiveness of course structure, (b) adequacy ofstudent/teacher interaction, (c) overall enjoymentand satisfaction, and (d) adequacy of peer-to-peerinteraction.

Since the research study incorporated a revisedsurvey instrument from Thomerson (1995), it wasnecessary to establish reliability of the new instru-ment. As a result, the researchers computed Cron-bach’s alphas for each of the four parts of the survey.The Cronbach alpha’s for each section was computedas follows: (a) effectiveness of course structure (.92),(b) adequacy of student/teacher interaction (.80), (c)overall enjoyment and satisfaction (.93), and (d)adequacy of peer-to-peer interaction (.86). Afterestablishing the reliability of the survey instrument,250 surveys were sent to preservice teachers enrolledin teacher preparation programmes at the sevenuniversities in the USA as previously mentioned. Ofthe 250 surveys mailed, 103 were returned for dataanalysis, of the 103 only 92 were usable due toincomplete information. The survey sought toanswer the following research question:

1.

How do perceptions differ between male andfemale teacher candidates/students of selectedteacher training institutions toward effective course

structure, adequacy of student/teacher interaction,overall enjoyment and satisfaction, and adequacyof peer-to-peer interaction of teacher preparationcourses delivered at a distance?

3.2. Limitations

After completing this study, the findings arelimited in a variety of ways. The limitations are asfollows:

1.

This study was only limited to seven universitiesthat received PT3 grants from the US Depart-ment of Education; therefore, caution should betaken in generalizing the results to other uni-versity teacher preparation programmes in theUSA or internationally.

2.

In this study, the sample included responses fromdistance education students in teacher prepara-tion programmes from only seven universities,the responses may not be representative of alldistance education students in teacher prepara-tion programmes and responses from students inthe seven institutions under investigation maynot be representative as well.

3.3. Data analyses

Because of the nature of the survey instrumentused in this study, standard descriptive statistics(means and standard deviations), along with corre-lations and t-tests were used to provide data onwhat distance education students enrolled in teacherpreparation deemed important as they were enrolledin their courses.

4. Findings

In this study, a total of 92 participants (21 malesand 71 females) completed the survey and returnedthe survey in the requested time period to beincluded in the study. Of these 92 participants, theirclassifications were as follows: one freshman, threesophomores, six juniors, 48 seniors, 16 post-bachelor students, 13 master’s students, and fiveothers. See Table 1 for this information.

4.1. Research question #1

Research question 1 asked, ‘‘How do perceptionsdiffer between male and female teacher candidatesof selected institutions towards effective course

ARTICLE IN PRESSA. Young, C.W. Lewis / Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (2008) 601–609 605

structure, adequacy of student/teacher interaction,overall enjoyment and satisfaction, and peer-to-peerinteraction?’’ An independent t-test was applied tocompare the mean differences of male and femaleteacher candidates’ perception of distance learningcourses with regard to course structure, student/teacher interaction, overall enjoyment, and peer-to-peer interaction (see Table 2). The descriptivestatistics indicated that female students’ overallmeans were somewhat but not significantly higherthan those of their male counterparts with respect tothe effectiveness of course structure. The femalescores ranged from 5.31 to 5.75, indicating thatfemale students felt that course structure was anessential ingredient of their distance educationexperience. Male respondents had a score range of4.38–5.29. The independent sample t-test wasapplied to compare the mean differences betweenmale and female respondents with respect to course

Table 1

Demographics and related characteristics of pre-service students

enrolled in distance course (N ¼ 92)

Gender Number/percent Classification Number/percent

Male 21 (22.8%) Freshman 1 (1.1%)

Female 71 (77.2%) Sophomore 3 (3.3%)

Junior 6 (6.5%)

Senior 48 (52.2%)

Post-bacc. 16 (17.4%)

Masters 13 (14.1%)

Table 2

Individual questions and cluster means and standard deviations for

female ¼ 71, male ¼ 21)

Question

12. The instructor used the time effectively to meet the objectives of the c

16. Examples, guidelines, illustrations were effectively used by the instr

18. Examples the instructor gave were appropriate and clear

19. The amount of material covered in each session was appropriate

23. The course content was presented in an organized manner and refl

the terminal course objectives

29. The grading of assignments was fair

Overall cluster

�po.05, df ¼ 90.��Degrees of freedom was reduced because equal variances not assu

structure. While the overall effectiveness did notprove to be statistically significant, the results of Q23 were statistically significant (t ¼ 2.18, df ¼ 90,po.05), indicating that female students rated theorganization of content more favourably than didtheir male counterparts.

Means, standard deviations, and a t-test were runwith regard to differences in perception betweenmale and female respondents about student/teacherinteraction. The mean scores showed that in allcategories, female students had a somewhat higherscore on all items than their male counterparts. Thescores for the female respondents ranged from 4.76to 6.11, while male respondents had scores rangingfrom 4.29 to 5.19. The standard deviations forfemales were 1.09–2.23, and for males they were1.42–2.15 (see Table 3).

The independent sample t-test was applied tocompare the mean differences between male andfemale students in relation to student/teacherinteraction. The results indicated that this questiontested statistically significant (t ¼ 3.10, df ¼ 90,po.01). The results indicated that female studentsfelt more comfortable about keeping in contact withthe instructor as germane to good student/teacherinteraction. Their male counterparts felt less com-fortable.

Table 4 shows the results of the comparison of thedifferences between male and female students withrespect to overall satisfaction. The mean scorespresented in the table indicate an overall mean score

male and female students with regard to course structure (N:

Mean SD t p

ourse Male 4.90 1.70 1.20 .23

Female 5.37 1.50

uctor Male 4.62 1.60 1.69 .10

Female 5.31 1.67

Male 4.38 1.80 1.84 .07

Female 5.34 1.71

Male 4.95 1.66 .91 .37

Female 5.34 1.73

ected Male 5.00 1.58 2.18� .03

Female 5.75 1.32

Male 5.29 1.10 1.46 .15

Female 5.75 1.32

Male 4.86 1.34 1.80�� .08

Female 5.45 1.31

med using Levene’s test of equity for variances.

ARTICLE IN PRESS

Table 3

Individual questions and cluster means and standard deviations for male and female students with regards to student/teacher interaction

(N: female ¼ 71, male ¼ 21)

Question Mean SD t P

9. I felt comfortable contacting my instructor Male 5.19 1.54 3.09 .00�

Female 6.11 1.09

15. The instructor was responsive to to student needs Male 5.14 1.71 .13 .90

Female 5.20 1.71

20. Assignments were graded and returned in a timely manner Male 4.29 2.15 .87 .39

Female 4.76 2.23

24. The instructor encouraged participation Male 5.14 1.42 1.88 .06

Female 5.72 1.17

31. My contact with the instructor was adequate Male 4.71 1.74 1.73 .09

Female 5.38 1.50

Overall cluster Male Male 4.90 1.32 1.80 .08

Female 5.43 1.17

�po.05, df ¼ 90.

Table 4

Individual questions and cluster means and standard deviations for male and female students with regards to overall satisfaction and

enjoyment (N: female ¼ 71, male ¼ 21)

Question Mean SD t p

17. I enjoyed my distance class more than the traditional class Male 3.76 2.26 1.23 .22

Female 4.42 2.14

21. I felt a sense of accomplishment after completing the course Male 4.95 1.57 .53 .60

Female 5.20 1.81

28. I would recommend that other teacher candidates take

similar courses from the department

Male 4.81 1.86 1.08 .28

Female 5.31 1.86

30. I feel I am a self-directed learner and this type of course

works best for me

Male 4.86 1.98 1.06 .29

Female 5.35 1.86

33.I would take more online courses if they were available to me Male 5.14 1.98 .43 .67

Female 5.37 2.15

Overall cluster Male 4.73 1.67 .95 .35

Female 5.13 176

*po.05, df ¼ 90.

A. Young, C.W. Lewis / Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (2008) 601–609606

of 5.13 for female students and 4.72 for malestudents. The scores indicate moderate agreementby female students, while the male respondentsindicated a more neutral stance about overallenjoyment and satisfaction with distance coursesor programmes. The mean scores for the respon-dents indicated that females were somewhat morelikely to enjoy distance learning than their malecounterparts. However, the t-test comparingmales and females on their perception of overallenjoyment and satisfaction with distance coursesor programmes did not indicate any significantdifferences.

As depicted in Table 5, peer-to-peer interactionwas not rated highly by participants of either

gender. The mean scores were lower for this clusterthan for the other three clusters. The overall meanscores for male and female respondents were 3.69and 4.08, respectively. The scores indicated thatperceptions of peer-to-peer interaction were ratednear neutral by the respondents in a distanceenvironment. Overall, the means of the femaleteacher candidates were somewhat higher thanthose of the males in all the clusters. However,there was no significant gender differences found onpeer-to-peer interaction.

In summary, female students scored some-what higher on the average for all four clusterswith regard to course structure, student/teacherinteraction, overall enjoyment and satisfaction and

ARTICLE IN PRESS

Table 5

Individual questions and cluster means and standard deviations for male and female students with regards to peer-to-peer interaction (N:

female ¼ 71, male ¼ 21)

Question Mean SD t p

Q14. I was able to get to know others in my distance class Male. 3.29 1.76 1.08 .29

Female 3.84 2.16

Q32. Student contact was adequate, and I was able to learn from my peers Male 4.10 1.79 .39 .71

Female 4.28 2.04

Overall cluster Male 3.69 1.58 .82 .42

Female 4.08 2.00

A. Young, C.W. Lewis / Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (2008) 601–609 607

peer-to-peer interaction. The test results for ques-tions 9 and 23 were statistically significant. Femalerespondents were more likely than their malecounterparts to feel positive about teacher/studentcontact and the presentation of the content inrelation to the given course objectives.

5. Discussion

So what can teacher education programmes learnas a result of this study? First, the demographics ofthe study sample reveal that the majority of students(59%), in this study were over the age of 25. Byunveiling this information, teacher education pro-grammes who prepare teachers at a distance aremore likely to have a non-traditional clienteletaking teacher preparation courses. This is consis-tent with the extant literature that older students aremore likely to take distance courses (Aljarrah, 2000;IHEP, 1999; NCES, 2001).

Second, another interesting trend that emergedwhen examining the demographic make-up of thesample was that approximately 77% of the samplewas female. The results illustrate that the majorityof students in teacher preparation programmes on-campus are female (Landsman & Lewis, 2006), thisalso holds true at distance sites also. This trend alsosupports the extant literature as well that documentsthat the majority of students involved in distanceeducation in all fields are female (Aljarrah, 2000;Thomerson, 1995; Tsay, 1999).

Third, the general characteristics of the partici-pants in this study revealed that they were between18 and 60 years of age with 59% over the age of 25.The findings are consistent with past and currentstudies and support the notion that older studentsare more likely to take distance courses (Aljarrah,2000; IHEP, 1999; NCES, 2001). Roughly three-fourths of the respondents were female, indicatingthat a higher percentage of females than males

participated in distance education courses. Thefindings support other research in the area ofdistance education where a higher percentage offemale students participate in distance educationcourses (Aljarrah, 2000; Thomerson, 1995; Tsay,1999).

Fourth, the research question examined thediffering perceptions between male and femaleteacher candidates/students of selected teachertraining institutions toward effective course struc-ture, adequacy of student/teacher interaction, over-all enjoyment and satisfaction and adequacy ofpeer-to-peer interaction of teacher preparationcourses delivered at a distance. Female studentsscored somewhat higher but not significantly higheron the average for all four clusters with regard tocourse structure, student/teacher interaction, overallcourse satisfaction and peer interaction. Of note isthe fact that female students had relatively highmean scores for student teacher interacting indicat-ing that female students were more apt to considerinteractivity between themselves and teacher as keyissue. Interactivity is critical in distance educationand the results seem to go along with the findings ofother studies (Roberson & Klotz, 2002; Shin &Chan, 2004; Gabriel, 2004).

5.1. Recommendations for teacher education

programmes

As distance education becomes more prevalent inthe 21st century, teacher education programmesshould become more active in this arena to trainfuture teachers (Beaudoin, 1990; Potashnik &Capper, 1998). A review of the literature and thefindings of this study indicate that teacher prepara-tion via distance education is basically untapped bymany universities (Beaudoin, 1990; Potashnik &Capper, 1998). Given this, the following recommen-dations are made to teacher education programmes

ARTICLE IN PRESSA. Young, C.W. Lewis / Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (2008) 601–609608

to consider expanding their outreach to prospectivestudents in the area of teacher preparation:

1.

Education professionals in teacher educationprogrammes should begin the uncomfortableconversations regarding the viability of trainingteachers at a distance. By doing so, theseeducation professionals can address the philoso-phical issue if teacher candidates can learn thecontent of their discipline along with completingthe field experiences via distance education.

2.

Teacher preparation programmes should activelyrecruit non-traditional students (students abovethe age of 25) into these distance educationteacher preparation programmes. As a result ofthis recruitment strategy, universities can in-crease the diversity of their student populationswhile fulfilling the needs in many school districtsto have a high-quality diverse teaching force.

3.

Teacher preparation programmes should providecomprehensive professional development train-ing to faculty who will work in distance educa-tion programmes. By providing professionaldevelopment to faculty, these faculty memberswill be prepared for the rigors of teaching in atotally ‘‘on-line’’ teacher preparation pro-gramme. This is especially important given thefindings of the study that documents that femalescorrespond more frequently with instructors thantheir male counterparts.

6. Conclusion

Distance education has been around for manyyears, what has changed is the way in whichit is delivered. We have moved from correspon-dence courses to the more sophisticated deliveryusing synchronous and asynchronous approaches.Students can complete work at anytime convenientto them. The proliferation of distance courses inmany colleges and universities is of utmost im-portance to teacher preparation programmes, con-sidering that these individuals may one day devise‘‘cutting edge’’ technology driven approaches todeliver courses. It is obvious having seen the morethan 150 years of distance education that thesophistication of distance courses will only getbetter.

The study looked at perceptions of pre-serviceteachers on courses and programmes delivered at adistance. Analysis of the survey instrument pro-

vided the basis for the conclusions. The followingconclusions were drawn from the findings of thestudy:

(a)

pre-service teachers have a more or less positiveresponse to distance education in terms ofoverall satisfaction and enjoyment and

(b)

female students scored somewhat although notsignificantly higher on student/teacher interac-tion, peer-to-peer interaction, course structureand overall enjoyment.

Female pre-service teachers unlike their malecounterparts seemed to be concerned about stu-dent/teacher interactivity, teacher preparation pro-grammes must offer a diversity of interactiveelements for its female students while exploringfurther the elements that will cause male students tocontinue to take distance courses while not ostraci-zing them.

6.1. Recommendations for future research

To promote the expansion of teacher preparationprogrammes, the following recommendations areprovided as areas of future research:

1.

A large-scale study should be conducted thatexamines the perceptions of distance educationstudents in teacher preparation programmesacross all institution types.

2.

More research should be conducted to examine ifthere are any differences in teaching ability forstudents who were prepared in teacher prepara-tion programmes on-campus vs. in the distanceeducation modality.

3.

More empirical studies should be conducted toexamine if there are any differences in teachingability for students who are prepared in on-campus teacher preparation programmes vs.preparation in distance education teacher pre-paration programmes.

6.2. Implications for international educators

As a result of this American study, the authorshave provided recommendations for internationalreaders involved in teacher preparation. They are asfollows:

1.

Convene a committee of relevant stakeholders atthe university to discuss the pros and cons of

ARTICLE IN PRESSA. Young, C.W. Lewis / Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (2008) 601–609 609

using distance technology for teacher prepara-tion. By convening this meeting of relevantstakeholders, essential planning can begin toproperly implement a distance education pro-gramme focused on preparing future teachers.

2.

Provide comprehensive professional developmentand training opportunities for faculty who will bepart of the programme. The key to make teacherpreparation work at a distance is having facultyat the university who can properly use it.

3.

Recruit students for your teacher preparationprogramme that are non-traditional students(over the age of 25). The findings of this studyreveal that this is the most captive audience forthis type of programme.

References

Aljarrah, A. (2000). Distance education: Community college

students’ perspectives and attitude toward online courses.

Doctoral dissertation, Colorado State University, Fort

Collins, unpublished.

Allen, M., Bourhis, J., Burrell, N., & Mabry, E. (2002).

Comparing student satisfaction with distance education to

traditional classrooms in higher education: A meta-analysis.

The American Journal of Distance Education, 16(2), 83–87.

Beaudoin, M. (1990). The instructor’s changing role in distance

education. The American Journal of Distance Education, 4(2),

26–34.

Blumenstyk, G. (1998). Western Governors U takes shape as a

new model of higher education. The Chronicle of Higher

Education, February 6, 1998.

Downs, M. E. (1998). Experiences of secondary school students,

teachers and administrators in a distance education course.

Dissertation Abstract International, 59(08), 170B (UMI No.

9903392).

Eastmond, D. V. (1998). Adult learners and internet-based

distance education. New Directions for Adult and Continuing

Education, # 78, Jossey-Boss Publishers.

Friel, S. N., & Carboni, L. W. (2000). Using video-based

pedagogy in an elementary mathematics methods course.

School Science and Mathematics, 100(3), 118–128.

Gabriel, M. A. (2004). Learning together: Exploring group

interactions online. Journal of Distance Education (Revue De

L’Education A Distance), 19(1), 54–72.

Hallinan, M. T., & Khmelkov, V. T. (2001). Recent developments

in teacher education in the United States of America. Journal

of Education for Teaching, 27(2), 175–185.

Institute for Higher Education Policy. (1999). What’s the

difference: A review of contemporary research on the effective-

ness of distance learning in higher education. Washington, DC:

Author.

Jegede, O., Taplin, M., & Chan, S. (2000). Trainee teachers’

perceptions of their knowledge about expert teaching.

Educational Research, 42(3), 287–308.

Landsman, J., & Lewis, C. (Eds.). (2006). White teachers in

diverse classrooms: A guide to building inclusive schools,

promoting academic achievement and eliminating racism.

Sterling, VA: Stylus.

Lin, H., Taylor, J., Gorrell, J., Hazareesingh, N., Carlson, H.L.,

& Asche, M. (1999). Early childhood and elementary preservice

teachers’ beliefs. Paper presented at the Meeting of the

American Educational Research, Montreal, Canada. (ERIC

Document Reproduction Service no. ED430677)

Mowrer-Popiel, E., & Pollard, C. (1994). An analysis of the

perceptions of pre-service teachers toward technology and its

use in the classroom. Journal of Instructional Psychology,

21(2), 131–139.

National Center for Education Statistics. (2002). Distance

education instruction by postsecondary faculty and staff: Fall

1998. Washington, DC: US Department of Education.

Potashnik, M., & Capper, J. (1998). Distance education: Growth

and diversity. Finance and Development, 3, 42–45.

Roberson, T.J., & Klotz, J. (2002). How can instructors and

administrators fill the missing link in online instructions?

Retrieved January, 18, 2003, from State University of West

Georgia, Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration,

5(4). Web site: /http://www.westga.edu/�distance/ojdla/

winter54/roberson54.htmS.

Sharpe, T., & Byra, M. (1997). Using technology in preservice

teacher supervision. Physical Educator, 54(1), 11–20.

Shin, N., & Chan, J. K. Y. (2004). Direct and indirect effects of

online learning on distance education. British Journal of

Educational Technology, 35(3), 275–288.

Thomerson, J. D. (1995). Students perceptions of the affective

experiences in distance learning courses. Dissertation Abs-

tracts International, 56(05), 1751 (UMI No. 9531182).

Tsay, M. (1999). Students’ preferences for strategies to facilitate

self-directedlearning in distance education in Taiwan.

Doctoral dissertation, Colorado State University, Fort

Collins, unpublised.

Willis, E. M., & Raines, P. (2001). Technology in secondary

teacher education: Integration, implications and ethics for the

changing roles of teachers. T.H.E. Journal, 29(2), 54–64.

Williams, H. S., & Alawiye, O. (2001). Student teachers’

perceptions of a teacher training programme. College Student

Journal, 35(1), 113–119.

Wong, A. T. (1990). Extending university courses to rural

communities via satellite television. Journal of Educational

Television 16(1), 16(1), 5–12.

Yelland, N., Grieshaber, S., & Stokes, J. (2000). Technology in

teacher education: Examples of integration and implementa-

tion in early childhood courses. Journal of Information

Technology of Teacher Education, 9(1), 95–107.

Yildirim, S. (2000). Effects of an educational computing course

on pre-service and in-service teachers: A discussion and

analysis of attitude and use. Journal of Research on Computing

in Education, 32(4), 479–495.