This retrospective study presents a comparison of assessment results achieved by distancelearning students and classroom-based students undertaking the same module in a degree course. The purpose of the comparison is to provide some objective measurement of the quality of distance education in relation to conventional classroom-based education. The authors have selected three groups of students, who have all undertaken the same module in the B. Sc Health Studies degree programme offered by the University of Paisley. One group (in Paisley) IntroductionIn the United Kingdom, the university with the highest number of students is a distance education university (HESA, 2000). The higher education sector can clearly deliver 70Alt-J Volume 10 Number I distance education. However, in the current ideological and financial drive towards increasing the distance education component of higher education, one of the key questions is this: is the quality of the distance education offered in higher education equivalent to the quality of its classroom-based education?This paper reports a study carried out in the University of Paisley, which attempts to shed some light on this question. It makes a specific comparison of the results achieved by classroom-based students and distance-learning students undertaking the same degree course. All the students under comparison study the same module material and undertake identical assessments. But they study in different modes and in different locations in the world: some based on the campus in the town of Paisley and undertaking the course by conventional classroom-based learning; others geographically dispersed -with the majority living in Hong Kong -and accessing the course by distance learning.One indicator of the quality of learning and teaching is the results that students achieve in assessable coursework. Accordingly we have phrased our research question in the following terms: do post-registration nurses studying by distance learning achieve the same assessment results as colleagues undertaking the same module by conventional classroom-based study?Comparing distance education and classroom education Peterson (2001) states that scholars of distance learning fall into two main camps. The first camp argues that distance learning is an opportunity for those that could not usually attend university to participate in tertiary education; that it promotes lifelong learning; and that 'the experience of an online course can be as rich and fulfilling as the experience of a traditional course'. They argue that more diverse populations of students with different learning styles can benefit from online courses.The second camp argues that in distance learning the focus is on teaching rather than on learning, and that the claims of flexibility are not reflected in present distance learning courses. They argue that students are frustrated, not just by the feelings of isolation but by lack of feedback from their teachers and difficulty in understanding written instructions given to them (Peterson, 20...

This retrospective study presents a comparison of assessment results achieved by distancelearning students and classroom-based students undertaking the same module in a degree course. The purpose of the comparison is to provide some objective measurement of the quality of distance education in relation to conventional classroom-based education. The authors have selected three groups of students, who have all undertaken the same module in the B. Sc Health Studies degree programme offered by the University of Paisley. One group (in Paisley) undertook their studies by means of conventional classroom-based education, the second (in Hong Kong) by supported distance learning with face-to-face contact in the form of tutorials, and the third (in a geographically dispersed group in the United Kingdom and other countries) by supported distance learning with no face-to-face contact. The results obtained by these three groups of students were analysed. Because of the differences in the size of the groups, the Kruskal-Wallis 1-Way Anova test was applied to validate the face value findings. The authors include findings from the literature comparing distance education with conventional education and from cross-cultural studies to present their data in context. Analysis of the assessment results showed that students from all three groups were successful in their studies, but the students studying by distance learning obtained significantly higher end-of-module results than their classroom-based colleagues. This latter finding reflects the conclusion that other investigators have reached In their discussion the authors identify educational, cultural and personal factors that may help to explain their findings. A limitation in the study is that it concerns only one module in the degree programme. The research now moves on to comparing students who have undertaken the whole degree programme by the means described