ONLINE LEARNING VS TRADITIONAL LEARNING: THE

RESEARCH OF STUDENT ATTITUDES

Fran GALETIĆ
Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Zagreb, Trg. J.F. Kennedyja 6, 10000 Zagreb,
Croatia
[email protected]

Abstract
Education on all levels faced a significant threat due to the Covid-19 pandemic that started in
2020. On one hand, it was impossible to keep the education processes going the same way as
before, and on other hand no one could imagine stopping all education processes for a longer
period. The key role in the field of education was played by the informatics technology. The
solution was found in online learning using different platforms for communication in the real
time. Although having classes in completely new circumstances was something new and
unknown, both students and teachers have come to the point where they cannot wait for the time
of returning to physical classes. This paper aims to detect the student attitudes to the online
learning comparing it to the traditional learning at the university. Using a survey on a sample of
276 respondents, two main hypotheses are confirmed: Students prefer the traditional way of
teaching to the online teaching and Better students appreciate more the traditional teaching than
under average students. The sample is distributed among all years of the study, from the first
year of bachelor study to the final year of the master study. The main aim of this research is to
detect how satisfied the students are with the online classes, compared to the traditional teaching
methods onsite. The results show that 52.9% of students prefer onsite classes, and 28.6% prefer
online classes. For 65.9% of the respondent online classes are worse than onsite classes and
only 19.2% of students consider online classes better. Students with higher average grades are
more satisfied with traditional onsite classes, and less satisfied with online classes. This can also
be interpreted as the higher satisfaction with online classes for under average student and their
lower satisfaction with traditional classes.

Keywords: online learning process, student satisfaction, research, Croatia, Covid-19

JEL classification: I23, D83, A10, D24

Introduction

In 2020, the world has faced the pandemic of Covid-19, which is something unique in the
modern history in many different senses. Global economic development was almost stopped,

501
everyday life of each individual has changed, tourism was extremely reduced, and culture and
sport events were stopped. Education on all levels faced a significant threat. On one hand, it was
impossible to keep the education processes going the same way as before, and on other hand no
one could imagine stopping all education processes for a longer period.

The key role in the field of education has had the informatics technology and online learning.
While online learning was not something radically new in 2020, the Covid-19 pandemic was the
first time for the majority of students and teachers to use it. Forced by the vis maior, the whole
education system switched to online classes in a very short period. Attending classes on different
platforms, using video and audio streams, multimedia and television suddenly became our
reality.

Despite the initial joy of having classes in completely new circumstances, both students and
teachers have come to the point where they cannot wait for the time of returning to physical
classes. This paper analyses the students’ attitudes towards online classes, especially through the
sphere of comparing them with the “classical” teaching at the university.

Literature overview

Many authors have analysed the online learning and examining before the Covid-19 crisis
appeared (Aisbitt and Sangster, 2005; Buchanan, 2000; Bostow et al., 1995; Brown and
Liedholm, 2002). While a number of studies have been conducted on the impact of online
assessment and teaching methods on student learning, the field does not seem settled around the
promised benefits of such approaches. It is argued that the reason for this state of affairs is that
few studies have been able to control for a number of confounding factors in student
performance. Angus and Watson (2009) report on the introduction of a regular low-mark online
assessment tool in a large, first-year business mathematics course at the University of New South
Wales, a major Australian university. Using a retrospective regression methodology together
with a very large and rich data set, they test the proposition that exposure to the online
assessment instrument enhances student learning. Significantly, they are able to control for prior
student aptitude, in-course mastery, gender and even effort via a voluntary class attendance
proxy. Furthermore, the study incorporates two large, and statistically diverse cohorts as well as
manipulations in the model tested to robustly examine the outcomes. Our central result is that
higher exposure to the online instrument robustly leads to higher student learning, all else being
equal.

Boyle and Hutchison (2009) assert the importance of e-assessment, suggesting that assessment
questions and tasks will change substantially as the art of e-assessment progresses. Authors
exemplify sophisticated e-assessment tasks, note taxonomic schemes and seek to identify aspects
of their definition. Next, some key claims for sophisticated e-assessment tasks are summarised
and evaluated: sophisticated e-assessment tasks can be used to assess novel constructs, and
sophisticated e-assessment tasks can be used to address summative and formative assessment
purposes.

502
There has been much research examining online learning in universities, but two questions seem
to have been largely overlooked in this context: which students voluntarily utilise web-based
learning; and does this use influence their academic achievement? Hoskins and Van Hooff
(2005) aimed to determine whether the approaches to studying, ability, age, and gender of 110
undergraduates in the second year of a psychology degree predicted the extent to which they
utilised online learning using Web Course Tools in support of a core Biological Psychology unit.
Multiple linear regressions and discriminant function analysis were used to examine whether
individual differences predicted WebCT use, while analysis of covariance determined whether
web use influenced academic achievement. The number of hits, length of access, and use of the
bulletin board was predicted by age, with older students using WebCT more. These factors were
also influenced by ability and achievement orientation. The degree of participation in self-
assessment was not predicted by student variables, but, of those that repeated an online quiz,
improvement was more likely in those with lower achievement orientation. Only bulletin board
use influenced achievement, with those posting messages outperforming those not using, or
passively using bulletin boards. Individual differences will determine the extent to which
students utilise this facility.

As online and blended learning has become common place educational strategy in higher
education, educators need to reconceptualise fundamental issues of teaching, learning and
assessment in non-traditional spaces. These issues include concepts such as validity and
reliability of assessment in online environments in relation to serving the intended purposes, as
well as understanding how formative assessment functions within online and blended learning.
Gikandi et al. (2011) provide a systematic qualitative review of the research literature on online
formative assessment in higher education. The key findings are that effective online formative
assessment can foster a learner and assessment centered focus through formative feedback and
enhanced learner engagement with valuable learning experiences. On-going authentic assessment
activities and interactive formative feedback were identified as important characteristics that can
address threats to validity and reliability within the context of online formative assessment.

Increasing numbers of universities are offering courses in online and hybrid formats. One
challenge in online assessment is the maintenance of academic integrity. Hollister and Berenson
(2009) present a thorough statistical analysis to uncover differences in student performance when
online exams are administered in a proctored environment (i.e., in class) versus an unproctored
environment (i.e., offsite). Controlling for student grade point average, no significant differences
in mean overall course performance or exam performance between the two groups were found,
nor were there any differences in the mean vectors of individual exam scores. The study reveals
that the group taking online exams in the unproctored environment has significantly more
variation in their performance results. In examining potential causes of the greater variation,
analyses were performed to assess whether an increased level of possible cheating behaviour
could be observed from performance results for students in the unproctored section. No evidence
of cheating behaviour was found.

503
To address concerns raised regarding the use of online course-based summative assessment
methods, a quasi-experimental design was implemented in which students who completed a
summative assessment either online or offline were compared on performance scores when using
their self-reported preferred or non-preferred modes. Hewson (2012) found performance scores
not to differ depending on whether the assessment was completed in the preferred or non-
preferred mode. These findings provide preliminary support for the validity of online assessment
methods.

Ardid et al (2020) have studied the use of online exams as part of the evaluation process in the
context of blended assessment. The online exams have been used in three different situations: in
an evaluation-proctored exam, in an evaluation-unproctored exam and as a training-homework
task. The analysis shows that the students' online mark clearly depends on the way the online
exam was performed. It has also been proved that the weight of the online exams in the final
mark does not affect the results of the online exams, and that the results obtained in the
unproctored environment present a bias towards higher ratings, as well as a greater dispersion of
results regarding the case of proctored environment.

Traditional and online university courses share expectations for quality content and rigor.
Student and faculty concerns about compromised academic integrity and actual instances of
academic dishonesty in assessments, especially with online testing, are increasingly troublesome.
Recent research suggests that in the absence of proctoring, the time taken to complete an exam
increases significantly and online test results are inflated. Alessio et al. (2018) use a randomized
design in seven sections of an online course to examine test scores from 97 students and time
taken to complete online tests with and without proctoring software, controlling for exam
difficulty, course design, instructor effects, and student majors. Results from fixed effects
estimated from a fitted statistical model showed a significant advantage in quiz performance (7-9
points on a 100 point quiz) when students were not proctored, with all other variables statistically
accounted for. Larger grade disparities and longer testing times were observed on the most
difficult quizzes, and with factors that reflected the perception of high stakes of the quiz grades.
Overall, use of proctoring software resulted in lower quiz scores, shorter quiz taking times, and
less variation in quiz performance across exams, implying greater compliance with academic
integrity compared with when quizzes were taken without proctoring software.

Much has been written about student and faculty opinions on academic integrity in testing.
Currently, concerns appear to focus more narrowly on online testing, generally based on
anecdotal assumptions that online students are more likely to engage in academic dishonesty in
testing than students in traditional on-campus courses. To address such assumptions, Beck
(2014) has used a statistical model to predict examination scores and academic dishonesty in
testing. Using measures of human capital variables (for example, grade point average, class rank)
to predict examination scores, the model provides for a comparison of R-2 statistics. This model
proposes that the more human capital variables explain variation in examination scores, the more
likely the examination scores reflect students' abilities and the less likely academic dishonesty
was involved in testing.

504
Methodology and data sources

In order to conduct the analysis of students’ attitudes towards online education, this paper
presents the primarily data collected in a survey. The survey was made online between the
students of the University of Zagreb. The period of collecting the data was March 2021. At the
period of collecting the answers, the majority of classes at the University of Zagreb were held
online. The total sample is 276. Students that took part in this survey are distributed on all years
of the study, from the 1 year of the bachelor program, to the last year of the master program.
st

Using data collected through the survey, author shows the most important findings using
descriptive statistics (Cortinhas, Black, 2013; Bradley, 2011; Witte, Witte, 2017; Moore, Notz,
Fligner, 2021). Additionally, author conducts the correlation analysis between the selected
variables. The purpose of these correlation analyses is to detect the possible connection between
different variables analysed in the research.

The main motive to conduct this research is to find out how satisfied are the students with the
online classes and how do they compare online classes to regular onsite classes. Through the
research, there are two main hypotheses that the research is expected to conform.

H1: Students prefer the traditional way of teaching to the online teaching.

H2: Better students appreciate more the traditional teaching than under average students.

Economic aspects of online classes

Behind the whole analysis of the benefits of online classes and onsite classes, there is a
completely new dimension when taking into consideration economic aspects of both systems.
Here the analysis is limited to the online classes caused by the pandemic. This means that there
are no alternatives and no possibilities of combining online and onsite classes.

Traditional onsite classes require the physical space at the university where students and teachers
spend time in the educational process. This creates certain costs, such as electricity, heating or
cooling the air, water, but also paper, chalks, markers etc. In addition, there is the cost of
cleaning the rooms. All these costs are calculated and included in the cost of education process.

505
On the other hand, all these mentioned costs mostly disappear in the online classes. Some of the
costs are transferred to students and teachers, such as the electricity needed to perform the
classes. From the aspect of the educational institution, this should be cost saving, and for
individuals included into the educational processes, this rises the costs.

An important investment during online classes is definitely the IT equipment. Despite the fact
that nowadays probably everyone has a personal computer, a tablet or a smart phone, including
the internet connection, the additional costs could emerge from certain elements such as cameras
which are necessary for real-time online visual communication. Online classes also require flat
internet, as opposed to the internet by consumption, which could be extremely expensive when
using it continuously.

Cost cuttings come also from the possibility to follow the online classes from any part of the
world, which means that students who live in a place different from the place of the study do not
have to pay for housing and/or for transport. However, probably the most important saving for
everyone included into online classes is timesaving. According to the well-known aphorism
“time is money”, online classes can help saving a lot of time, which can be used for other
activities.

Results and discussion

This part of the paper is the most important part of the whole analysis; it represents the results
obtained through the survey. The most important and interesting findings from the research are
presented here. At the beginning, there are several general information about the students who
have participated in a survey.

Graph 1. Distribution by the year of the study

506
Source: authors’ research

The distribution of the students who have participated on the survey by the year of the study
shows that there are students from all different years. Years 1 – 3 represent the bachelor study,
years 4 – 5 represent the master study, and in the case of the integrated study program, years 1 –
5 represent all five years of such program. The majority of students are from the first year, but in
a sample of 276, there are enough representatives of every year of the study.

Graph 2. Average grade

Source: authors’ research

507
Graph 2 shows the distribution according to the average grade on the study. In Croatian
education system, the lowest grade is 1 and the highest grade is 5. As the grade 1 means fail, the
lowest possible grade in students’ index is 2. The majority of students have grade 4, followed by
grade 3. Further 8.3% of students have the average grade 2, and only 6.9% have the highest
average grade 5.

Graph 3. Have you ever repeated a year in your study?

Source: authors’ research

Slightly over one-fourth of the students who participated in a survey have repeated a year in the
study at least once, and almost three-thirds have never repeated a year. This question is closely
connected to the next question about the ECTS points.

508
Graph 4. The remaining ECTS points

Source: authors’ research

Graph 4 represents the distribution according to the number of remaining ECTS points. Each
year of the study has 60 ECTS points, which are divided into 30 ECTS points for each semester.
More than one half of the students have 10 or less ECTS points remaining. Further 12% have
between 11 and 15 ECTS points remaining, 14.1% have between 16 and 20, 7.2% between 21
and 25, 2.9% between 26 and 30 and 7.6% of the students have over 30 ECTS remaining, which
is more than all ECTS points in one whole semester.

After these general part, the following questions focus on the main part of the analysis – the
satisfaction with the online classes.

509
Graph 5. Which form of classes suits you better?

Source: authors’ research

The majority of respondents have chosen the classical onsite classes. For 28.6% of students
online classes are preferred way of teaching and for 18.5% both forms of teaching are equally
desirable. These answers are the first confirmation of the first hypothesis (H1: Students prefer
the traditional way of teaching to the online teaching).

Graph 6. The comparison of online classes to onsite classes

Source: authors’ research

510
This question has the aim to compare online classes to the traditional onsite classes at the
university. Two-thirds of respondents consider online classes worse than onsite classes. For
19.2% of students online classes are better, and for 14.9% of the respondents these two forms are
equal. This question additionally confirms the hypothesis 1.

Graph 7. The main advantages of onsite classes

Source: authors’ research

The main advantage of onsite classes for respondents is the interaction with colleagues. The next
advantage, but with almost half as many responses, is that onsite classes require students to
follow more. For 19.2% of students the main advantage of onsite classes is interaction with the
teacher, and for 9.1% staying at the university instead of staying at home. 5.1% of the
respondents consider that there are no advantages of onsite classes.
Graph 8. The main advantages of online classes

Source: authors’ research

511
Next question addresses to the main advantaged of online classes. The waste majority of
students, three-quarters, have chosen saving time as the main advantage. For 14.9% of the
respondents the main advantage of online classes is staying at home, and 9.8% do not see any
advantages. Only 2 respondents have stated that the main advantage is no direct interaction with
the teacher and only 1 respondent said that the main advantage of online classes is no direct
interaction with the colleagues.

Graph 9. The satisfaction with online teaching (left) and onsite teaching (right) (1 is the lowest
and 5 is the highest grade)

Source: authors’ research

At the end of the research, respondents were asked to rate their satisfaction with online and
onsite teaching based on their experience so far. The most common grade for online classes is 3,
and the most common grade for onsite classes is 4.

The average grade for online classes is 3.19 with the standard deviation of 1.13. The average
grade for onsite classes is 3.67 with the standard deviation of 1.02. From these data, the
estimated intervals for average grade of satisfaction with the 95% confidence interval are:
(3.0592 < online < 3.3249)
(3.5498 < onsite < 3.7908)

From all these data obtained in the analysis, it is obvious that on average students prefer onsite
classes over online classes. Additionally, they rate onsite classes better than online classes.
According to these results, this is the third confirmation of the first hypothesis (H1: Students
prefer the traditional way of teaching to the online teaching).

It is very interesting to analyse the correlations between some answers. Here are some of the
most important results of the correlation analysis. There is a positive correlation between the
average grade and the satisfaction with onsite classes (coefficient of correlation = 0.17). But
there is also a negative correlation between the average grade and the satisfaction with online
classes (coefficient of correlation = -0.20). This suggests that students with better grades give

512
higher grades to the satisfaction with onsite classes and lower grades to the satisfaction with
online classes. In this way, the second hypothesis (H2: Better students appreciate more the
traditional teaching than under average students) was confirmed.

It is also interested to mention that the research revealed hoe the online exams influenced the
average grade and the number of exams the student have passed. Some students have passed
more exams (25% of the respondents), and some of them have passed less exams (18%) due to
the fact that the exams were conducted online. Similarly, 26% of the respondents have higher
average grade compared to the period before online exams, and 19% of them have lower grade.
These and other similar data are planned to be elaborated more detailed in a different paper
which should focus on online examination.

Conclusion

The analysis of this paper is oriented on the reality for everyone included into the education
process – the education during the Covid-19 pandemic. As the education processes could not be
stopped nor postponed, the only way to keep them going in a safe way was the move from
traditional onsite classes to online classes. This was possible due to the high grade of informatics
literature of both students and teachers.

The research was based on the primarily data collected using online survey during March 2021.
The total of 276 respondents has answered the survey, namely the students of the University of
Zagreb. The sample is distributed among all years of the study, from the first year of bachelor
study to the final year of the master study. The main aim of this research is to detect how
satisfied the students are with the online classes, compared to the traditional teaching methods
onsite.

Two hypotheses were posed at the beginning of the research, and through the whole analysis,
they were confirmed. The first hypothesis (H1: Students prefer the traditional way of teaching to
the online teaching) was confirmed in three ways. Firstly, 52.9% of students prefer onsite
classes, and 28.6% prefer online classes. Secondly, for 65.9% of the respondent online classes
are worse than onsite classes and only 19.2% of students consider online classes better. And
finally the average grade that student would giver to online classes is significantly lower than the
average grade they would give to traditional onsite classes.

The second hypothesis (H2: Better students appreciate more the traditional teaching than under
average students) was confirmed through the correlation analysis. Students with higher average
grades are more satisfied with traditional onsite classes, and less satisfied with online classes.
This can also be interpreted as the higher satisfaction with online classes for under average
student and their lower satisfaction with traditional classes.

513
This research has some limitations, of which the most important is the following. The
respondents have answered these questions during the period of online classes, and as this period
has been active for more than a year at the period of the research, the students of the first year
have never experienced the traditional classes at the university to that point of time. For further
research, the similar analysis could be conducted in other countries to compare the results and to
see if students in different countries have similar or different attitudes towards online learning
processes. Additionally, this research is planned to extend to online exams and the student
satisfaction with taking exams online.

References

Aisbitt, S.; Sangster, A. (2005) Using Internet-based On-line Assessment: A Case Study, Accounting Education,
Volume: 14, Issue: 4, Pages: 383-394
Alessio, H.M.; Malay, N.; Maurer, K.; Bailer, A.J.; Rubin, B. (2018) Interaction of Proctoring and Student Major on
Online Test Performance, International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, Volume: 19, Issue:
5, Pages: 165-185
Angus, S.D.; Watson, J. (2009) Does regular online testing enhance student learning in the numerical sciences?
Robust evidence from a large data set, British Journal of Educational Technology, Volume: 40, Issue: 2, Pages: 255-
272
Ardid, M.; Gomez-Tejedor, J.A.; Meseguer-Duenas, J.M.; Riera, J.; Vidaurre, A. (2020) Online exams for blended
assessment. Study of different application methodologies, Computers & Education, Volume: 81, Pages: 296-303
Beck, V. (2014) Testing a model to predict online cheating-Much ado about nothing, Active Learning in Higher
Education, Volume: 15, Issue: 1, Pages: 65-75
Bostow, D.E.; Kritch, K.M.; Tomplins, B.F. (1995) Computers and Pedagogy - Replacing Telling with Interactive
Computer-Programmed Instruction, Behavior Research Methods Instruments & Computers, Volume: 27, Issue: 2,
Pages: 297-300
Boyle, A .; Hutchison, D. (2009) Sophisticated tasks in e-assessment: what are they and what are their benefits?,
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, Volume: 34, Issue: 3, Pages: 305-319
Bradley, T. (2011) Essential Statistics for Economics, Business and Management, Wiley
Brown, B.W.; Liedholm, C.E. (2002) Can web courses replace the classroom in principles of microeconomics?,
American Economic Review, Volume: 92, Issue: 2, Pages: 444-448
Buchanan, T. (2000) The efficacy of a World-Wide Web mediated formative assessment, Journal of Computer
Assisted Learning, Volume: 16, Issue: 3, Pages: 193-200
Cortinhas, C.; Black, K. (2013) Statistics for Business and Economics, Wiley
Gikandi, J.W.; Morrow, D.; Davis, N.E. (2011) Online formative assessment in higher education: A review of the
literature, Computers & Education, Volume: 57, Issue: 4, Pages: 2333-2351
Hewson, c. (2012) Can online course-based assessment methods be fair and equitable? Relationships between
students' preferences and performance within online and offline assessments, Journal of Computer Assisted
Learning, Volume: 28, Issue: 5, Pages: 488-498
Hollister, K.K.; Berenson, M.L. (2009) Proctored Versus Unproctored Online Exams: Studying the Impact of Exam
Environment on Student Performance, Decision Sciences-Journal of Innovative Education, Volume: 7, Issue: 1,
Pages: 271-294

514
Hoskins, S.L.; Van Hooff, J.C. (2005) Motivation and ability: which students use online learning and what influence
does it have on their achievement?, British Journal of Educational Technology, Volume: 36, Issue: 2, Pages: 177-
192
Moore, D.S.; Notz, W.I.; Fligner, M.A. (2021) Loose-Leaf Version of The Basic Practice of Statistics, W. H.
Freeman
Witte, R.S.; Witte, J.S. (2017) Statistics, 11th Edition, Wiley

515
Reproduced with permission of copyright owner. Further reproduction
prohibited without permission.