Mark angelo mamaril

Students’ perceptions on distance Education:

A multinational study

Abstract
Many universities offer Distance Education (DE) courses and programs to address the diverse educational needs of
students and to stay current with advancing technology. Some Institutions of Higher Education (IHE) that do not offer DE
find it difficult to navigate through the steps that are needed to provide such courses and programs. Investigating
learners’ perceptions, attitudes and willingness to try DE can provide guidance and recommendations for IHEs that are
considering expanding use of DE formats. A survey was distributed to undergraduate students in Portugal, UAE and
Ukraine. The results of this pilot study showed that in all three countries, students’ major concerns about such programs
were time management, motivation, and English language skills. Although students were somewhat apprehensive many
indicated they were interested in taking DE courses. Six recommendations informed by interpretation of students’
responses and the literature, are offered to assist institutions who want to offer DE as part of their educational strategy.
Keywords: Distance education, Multinational study, Perceptions of distance education, Undergraduate students

Introduction
The World Wide Web has made information access and distribution of educational content available to a large fraction
of the world’s population and helped to move Distance Education (DE) to the digital era. DE has become increasingly
common in many universities worldwide (Allen & Seaman, 2017). Nonetheless, there are still many University that do
not provide this opportunity because it is not part of their institutional culture. As DE becomes more prevalent,
countries and Institutions of Higher Education (IHE) that do not provide DE courses will need to look at this option to
retain and expand their student population. (Keegan, 1994; Nakamura, 2017). In order to develop such programs, it is
useful to determine if students are receptive to taking such online courses and are prepared to do so. This study
addresses students’ perceptions and their interest in DE. In addition, it provides a comparative analysis across three
countries whose IHEs do not have extensive offerings in DE. The results of this research provide some strategies to
encourage and support students to take DE courses.

Literature review
A seminal article by Keegan (1980) presents key aspects of DE. Some of the elements Are: physical separation of teacher
and learner, learning occurs in the context of an Educational institution, technical media are used, teacher and learner
communicate, Face to face meetings are possible, and an industrial model of providing education is Used. More recently
varying definitions of DE seem to be based on the perspective of Various educators and to reflect the educational
culture of each country and IHE. How Ever, some common descriptors seem to be accepted by most stakeholders in the
field. Distance education is an educational experience where instructors and learners are Separated in time and space
(Keegan, 2002) which means it can happen away from an Academic institution and can lead to a degree or credential
(Gunawardena, McIsaac, & Jonassen, 2008). Although there are different types of DE, this research focuses on online
learning. The following types of online learning will be investigated: synchronous, asynchronous, Blended, massive
online open courses (MOOC), and open schedule online courses. In Synchronous instruction, teachers and learners meet
(usually online) for a session at a Predetermined time. According to Watts (2016) live streaming video and/or audio are
Used for synchronous interaction. Although videoconferencing allows participants to See each other this is not
considered a facetoface interaction because of the physical Separation (Keegan, 1980). Asynchronous instruction means
that teachers and learners do not have synchronous Sessions and that students have access to course content through
the Internet at any Time they want or need. Communication among the participants occurs mainly through Email and
online forums and is typically moderated by the instructor (Watts, 2016). According to Garrison (2000) “Asynchronous
collaborative learning may well be the Defining technology of the postindustrial era of distance education.” (p.12) Yet
another Type of DE is blended learning (BL). Garrison and Kanuka (2004) define BL as combin Ing facetoface classroom
time with online learning experiences. Although it is not Clear as to how much time is allocated to online in the blended
model “the real test of Blended learning is the effective integration of the two main components (facetoface And
Internet technology) such that we are not just adding on to the existing dominant Approach or method.” (p.97) In the BL
format different teaching strategies and instruc Tional technology can be used to help individuals who have different
learning styles, Needs and interests (Tseng & Walsh Jr., 2016). Another type of DE is MOOCs (Massive Online Open
Courses). This format was first Introduced in 2006 and offers distributed open online courses that are available without
Cost to a very large number of participants (Cormier, McAuley, Siemens, & Stewart, 2010). MOOCs origins can be traced
to the Open Access Initiative in 2002 which advo Cates sharing knowledge freely through the Internet. By providing
educational oppor Tunities MOOCs can address the increasing demand for training and education (ZawackiRichter &
Naidu, 2016). Finally, in open schedule online courses students Work asynchronously with all the materials being
provided digitally. Although there are Deadlines for submitting assignments, students working at their own pace have
some Independence as to when they do their coursework (Campus Explorer, 2019). There are advantages and
disadvantages in taking DE courses. Some of the advan Tages are selfpaced study, time and space flexibility, time saving
(no commute between Home and school) and the fact that a distance learning course often costs less. Disad Vantages
include a sense of isolation, the struggle with staying motivated, lack of face Toface interaction, difficulty in getting
immediate feedback, the need for constant and Reliable access to technology, and occasionally some difficulty with
accreditation (De Paepe, Zhu, & Depryck, 2018; Lei & Gupta, 2010; Venter, 2003; Zuhairi, Wahyono, & Suratinah, 2006).
Most of the literature concerning student perception of DE courses, both blended And entirely online, involves students
who have enrolled in online courses. Some arti Cles address comparisons of perceptions between facetoface and online
students Regarding DE (Daniels & Feather, 2002; Dobbs, del Carmen, & WaidLindberg, 2017; Hannay & Newvine, 2006;
Lanier, 2006). Additional studies address adult and under Graduate students and cover many aspects of the online
experience (Dobbs et al., 2017; Horspool & Lange, 2012; Seok, DaCosta, Kinsell, & Tung, 2010b, a). However, little, if Any
research has been conducted that only addresses perceptions of students who live In countries in which few IHEs offer
online courses. In a study comparing online and facetoface learning, Horspool and Lange (2012) Found that students
chose to take online courses to avoid travel time to class and Scheduling problems. A majority of both facetoface and
online students did not Experience technological issues. Both groups also found that communication with the Instructor
was adequate. Online students indicated that instructor response time to Questions was prompt. By contrast online
students perceived peer communication as Occurring much less often. Course satisfaction was comparable for both
formats (Horspool & Lange, 2012). Responses to another survey concerning online and trad Itional course formats found
that students’ reasons for taking online courses included Flexibility to accommodate work and family schedules, the
ability to avoid commuting To the university and more online courses being available to them (Dobbs et al., 2017). Both
online and traditional students agreed that traditional courses were easier, and They learned more in that format. They
also concurred that online courses required More effort. Experienced online students indicated that the quality of their
courses was Good while traditional students who had never taken an online course felt that the qual Ity of online
courses was lower. There is additional research that focuses on students including those enrolled in Community colleges,
MOOCs, blended learning as well as adult learners. Community College students’ and instructors’ perceptions of
effectiveness of online courses were Compared by Seok et al. (2010b, a). The researchers focused on pedagogical
characteris Tics (management, Universal Design for Learning, interaction, teaching design and con Tent) and technical
features (interface, navigation and support). In addition, responses Were examined based on various aspects of the
subjects’ demographics. Two surveys With 99 items were distributed electronically. One survey was for instructors and
the Other for students. In general, instructors and students indicated that teaching and Learning online was effective.
Female students responded more positively to most ques Tions concerning effectiveness, and instructors also found it
more positive (Seok et al., 2010b, a). Students who enrolled in a MOOC were motivated to take other courses in this for
Mat based on their perception that it was useful for achieving their goals. In addition, Their motivation was high if the
course was posted on a platform that was easy to use (Aharony & BarIlan, 2016). This study also found that
as students proceeded through the course, they gained confidence. Blended learning was examined by Kurt and Yildirim
(2018) to determine student satisfaction and what they considered to be important features of the blended format. The
results indicated that the Turkish students who participated, almost unanimously felt that BL was beneficial and that
their own role and the instructors’ role was central to their satisfaction. The authors stated, “the prominent components
in the process have been identified as facetoface lessons, the features of online course materials, LMS used,
designspecific activities, processbased measurement and evaluation, Studentstudent interaction and outofclass sharing
respectively.” (p. 439) DE has a growth potential and offers the opportunity to reach many people (Fidalgo, 2012), hence
it can be used as a technique for mass education (Perraton, 2008). According to Perraton (2008) DE can be adapted to
the needs of current and previous generations who did not complete their education. DE can also reach individuals who
live in remote locations and do not have the means to attend school.

Methodology
Study goals The goal of this pilot study is to examine what undergraduate students’ perceptions are concerning DE and
their willingness to enroll in this type of course. This study focuses on three countries that do not offer extensive DE
accredited programs. By comparing three countries with similar DE profiles, commonalties and differences that are
relevant and useful can be found. When the IHEs from these countries decide or have the conditions to move towards
DE, the results of this study may help them adapt this format to their particular context and students’ needs. Results
may also help IHEs plan their strategy for offering online courses to current and future students and attract prospective
students who otherwise would not be able to enroll in the facetoface courses that are available.

Research questions
Have undergraduate students taken an online course previously? What are undergraduate students’ perceptions of
distance education? What are the reasons for undergraduate students to enroll/not enroll is distance Education
courses? What preparation do undergraduate students feel they need to have before taking Distance education
courses? What is the undergraduate students’ receptivity towards enrolling in distance Education courses? What types
of distance education would undergraduate students be interested in Taking?

Setting
This research was conducted at IHEs in three countries (Portugal, Ukraine and UAE). A description of each country’s
sociodemographic and technological use provides a Context for this study. Portugal, a country located at the western
end of the European continent, has a resi Dent population of just over 10 million people (Instituto Nacional de
Estatistica, 2019). Data collected by Instituto Nacional de Estatistica in 2019 indicated that almost 81% of Households in
Portugal had Internet access at home. According to the Portuguese National Statistical Institute (2019), the rate of
Internet use by the adult population is About 76%. Among this population, people who attend or have completed
secondary And higher education have a higher percentage of Internet use (98%) (Instituto Nacional de Estatistica, 2019).
The most used devices to access the Internet are smartphones and laptops. Regarding Computer tasks, the most
frequent ones are copying and moving files and folders and Transferring files from the computer to other devices
(PORDATA – Base de Dados Portugal Contemporâneo, 2017). Among Internet users, 80% use social networks, which is a
higher percentage than The European Union (EU) average. Mobile Internet access (outside the home and work Place and
on portable devices) is 84% and maintains a strong growth trend (Instituto Nacional de Estatistica, 2019). Ukraine is one
of the postsoviet countries located in Eastern Europe and it strives to Be integrated in economic and political structures
of the EU. The current population of The country is 42 million. Despite the low incomes of many Ukrainians, modern
Technological devices are widespread among the population. The State Statistics Service Of Ukraine (2019) reported that
there were 26 million Internet subscribers in the country In the beginning of 2019. However, Ukrainians do not have a
high level of digital literacy Yet. According to the Digital Transformation Ministry of Ukraine (Communications
Department of the Secretariat of the CMU, 2019), almost 38% of Ukrainian people aged From 18 to 70 have poor skills in
computer literacy and 15.1% of the citizens have no com Puter skills. According to the survey conducted by the Digital
Transformation Ministry of Ukraine (The Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine, 2019) 27.5% Ukrainian families have a Tablet,
and 30.6% have one smart phone, 26.4% have two smart phones, 16.5% have Three smart phones and 10.8% have four
and more smart phones. As for laptops, 42.7% Ukrainian families have a laptop and 45.6% have a desktop computer
(The Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine, 2019). The data from the ministry did not indicate if families have Multiple devices,
however the data shows that technological devices are widespread. The United Arab Emirates (UAE) is a country
located in the Persian Gulf that bor Ders with Oman and Saudi Arabia. The UAE has a population of 9.77 million and is
One of the richest countries in the world based on gross domestic product (GDP) per Capita. The resident population
consists of 11,5% Emiratis and the remaining residents Are expats from countries such as India, Pakistan, Philippines,
Egypt and others (Global Media Insight, 2020). Regarding technology use, 91% of the residents use mobile Internetand
over 98% of The households have Internet access (Knoema, 2018). Mobile devices such as smart Phones are used to
access the Internet mainly at home or at work (Federal Competi Tiveness and Statistics Authority, 2017). In 2017 the
most frequent Internet activities were: sending/receiving emails (61%), Posting information or instant messaging (55%),
getting information about goods or Services (45%), reading or downloading online newspapers, magazines or electronic
Books (41%) and telephoning over the Internet/VOIP (33%). Downloading movies, im Ages, music, watching TV or video,
or listening to radio or music is also a frequent ac Tivity performed by 27% of the Internet users followed by Internet
banking (25%) and Purchasing or ordering good and services (22%) (Federal Competitiveness and Statistics Authority,
2017). While these three countries were selected due to the location of the researchers and Thus provided convenience
samples, the three countries have a similar lack of DE offer Ings. Online surveys were emailed to students enrolled in a
variety of undergraduate Facetoface courses during the fall semester of 2018. The students in Portugal and the UAE
were enrolled in a teacher education program and the survey was emailed to two Course sections in Portugal (73
students) and four course sections in the UAE (108 stu Dents). At the IHE in Ukraine, students were majoring in applied
mathematics, phil Ology, diagnostics, social work and philosophy, and surveys were emailed to 102 Students who were
enrolled in five course sections. In Portugal and Ukraine, the URL For the online survey was emailed by the instructor of
all the course sections. In the UAE the instructor who emailed the URL for the survey taught two of the course sec Tions.
The students in the other two sections knew this instructor from taking courses With her previously. The students
participating in this study were a convenience sample Based on the disciplines taught by the researchers.

Data collection
An online survey with 10 closed questions about undergraduate students’ perception and Receptivity towards enrolling
in DE courses was developed by the researchers. Ary, Jacobs, Sorensen, and Walker (2010) compared traditional
methods (i.e. facetoface, paper and Pencil) with webbased surveys and found the latter to be are more effective for
gathering Data from many participants. The questions designed by the researchers were informed by Their
experience/practice as well as indepth literature review. The survey was created to Respond to the research questions
that guided this study. Response choices to the multiple Choice questions were based on issues and concerns related to
DE. Students’ responses were Collected towards the end of the first semester of the 2018/19 academic year. The survey
was developed to address research questions that assess undergraduate stu Dents’ perceptions of DE and students’
receptivity towards enrolling in DE courses (c.f. Appendix). The use of surveys allows researchers to “obtain information
about thoughts, Feelings, attitudes, beliefs, values, perceptions, personality and behavioral intentions of Research
participants.” (Johnson & Christensen, 2014, p. 192) The survey questions Included multiple response formats: Likert
scale, select more than one response and mul Tiple choice. Surveys for Portugal were presented in Portuguese. In
Ukraine the surveys Were translated into Ukrainian. Since English is the language of instruction at the UAE Institution,
their survey was in English. The URL for the survey was emailed to students By their instructors and was available in an
online Google Form. The survey took approxi Mately 10 min to complete. The study consisted of a “selfselected”
convenience sample.

Data analysis
Survey results were recorded in Google Forms and an Excel spreadsheet was used to Collect students’ responses.
Descriptive statistics of the responses to the survey are Presented in graphs and tables with percentages of responses
displayed. The descriptive Statistics provide summaries about the sample’s answers to each of the questions as Well as
measures of variability (or spread) and central tendency.

Research approval and data management

The research proposal was submitted to the Research and Grants Committee and Approved by the Institutional Review
Board of the college in the UAE. No personal in Formation (name, College ID number or any other type of information
that allows the Identification of students) was asked from the students in the surveys. The surveys were Anonymous.
Only the Principal Investigator (PI) had access to all the data collected. The data will be stored in the PI’s password
protected computer for 5 years.
Results
Fifty five of the 73 Portuguese students who received the survey responded and 98 of The 108 UAE students responded.
In the Ukraine 102 students were sent surveys and 70 responded. Below are participants’ responses to questions
concerning age, gender, as Well as level of confidence using the computer and the Internet. Students’ age range was
from 17 to 50 years old. Most students’ age ranges were be Tween 17 and 29 years. Survey responses indicated that 7%
of the students in the UAE Were male and 93% female, in the Ukraine 43% were male and 57% female and in Portugal
9% male, and 91% female. Participants were asked about their level of confidence using a computer and the Internet.
Results are presented in Table 1. The use of participants from three countries allows the study of trends and to deter
Mine differences and/or similarities of perceptions about DE. Although the students Were enrolled in courses in diverse
content areas, they were all undergraduates, almost All under 30 years old, and most were confident using the
computer and Internet. These Demographic similarities provided a relatively cohesive group for this study while allow
Ing a comparison across countries. A range of questions were asked about students’ attitudes towards and experience
With DE. To determine the participants’ experience with DE two questions were asked. The data indicates that out of
223 students who responded to the survey, a total of 63 students have taken DE courses. Half of the Ukraine students,
about one quarter of The UAE students and only 5% of students in the group from Portugal had taken DE Courses (Fig.
1). As shown in Fig. 2, of the students who have had previous experience In DE, most Ukraine students have taken one
or two online courses, most UAE stu Dents have taken one course and a few Portuguese students have taken one
course. Table 1 Student confidence level using a computer and the Internet
Country Not at all Somewhat Neutral/ Cannot Confident Extremely
confident confident judge Percent Percent confident
Percent Percent Percent
Portugal 0.00 7.27 20.00 54.55 18.18
Ukraine 0.00 2.87 5.71 32.86 58.57
UAE 3.16 7.37 26.32 25.86 37.89

Fig. 1 Students that have taken distance education courses

More than half of Portuguese students, about two thirds of the Ukraine students and a little over one third of UAE
students had a Very favorable or Favorable attitude towards More than half of Portuguese students, about two thirds of
the Ukraine students and a little over one third of UAE students had a Very favorable or Favorable attitude towards DE.
Approximately one third of Portuguese and Ukraine students were Neutral/Unable to judge their attitude. A little less
than half of UAE students also indicated this. A small percentage of Portuguese, and one fifth of UAE students indicated
their attitude was Very unfavorable or Unfavorable and no Ukraine students reported this (Table 2). More than one
third of Portuguese students shared that managing class and study time, saving time by choosing study location and
working at their own pace were rea sons to enroll in DE. About two thirds of the students from Ukraine reported that
working at their own pace and managing their study time were reasons to enroll. A little more than half of these
students reported that reasons for enrolling in DE included managing class time, saving time by selecting study location
and not having to travel to school as well as having more options for courses or colleges to attend. Almost half of the
UAE students had similar reasons for enrolling in a DE courses including managing class and study time, saving time by
choosing study location and working at their ow de.. Approximately one third of Portuguese and Ukraine students were
Neutral/Unable to judge their attitude. A little less than half of UAE students also indicated this. A small percentage of
Portuguese, and one fifth of UAE students indicated their attitude was Very unfavorable or Unfavorable and no Ukraine
students reported this (Table 2). More than one third of Portuguese students shared that managing class and study
time, saving time by choosing study location and working at their own pace were rea sons to enroll in DE. About two
thirds of the students from Ukraine reported that working at their own pace and managing their study time were
reasons to enroll. A little more than half of these students reported that reasons for enrolling in DE included managing
class time, saving time by selecting study location and not having to travel to school as well as having more options for
courses or colleges to attend. Almost half of the UAE students had similar reasons for enrolling in a DE courses including
managing class and study time, saving time by choosing study location and working at their own

Fig. 2 Number of distance education courses taken

Table 2 Attitudes toward distance education

Country Very Unfavorabl Neutral/ Favorable Very
unfavorable e Percent Unable to Percent favorable
Percent judge Percent
percent
Portugal 0.00 7.27 34.55 52.73 5.45
Ukraine 0.00 0.00 31.43 42.86 25.71
UAE 8.42 12.63 42.11 21.05 15.79
pace. In addition, a little more than half of the UAE students also shared that having more options for courses or colleges
to attend were reasons to enroll. The reasons that were selected the least by all three groups were that courses were
less expensive and enrolling in a preferred program (Tables 3 and 4). Students were given eleven options as to why they
would not enroll in DE courses, which are displayed in Tables 5 and 6. Two reasons that were chosen most often were
difficulty staying motivated and preferring face-to-face classes. A small number of Ukraine students reported this as a
reason to not enroll in DE courses. Difficulty get ting immediate feedback was also a concern for UAE students. Close to
one third in the three groups indicated that difficulty contacting the instructor and interacting with peers as well as
missing campus life are reasons for not enrolling. About one tenth of Portuguese, one fifth of Ukraine and one fifth of
the UAE students reported difficulty getting accreditation as a reason for not enrolling. Not knowing enough about DE
was indicated by one tenth of Portuguese, one fifth of Ukraine and one fifth of the UAE students. Only a small number of
all the students indicated three categories that are frequently cited in the literature as preventing students from
enrolling, these include access to technology, feeling of isolation and too great an expense. Tables 7 and 8 show student
responses to a question regarding the preparation they think they would need before enrolling in a DE course. A little
over one tenth of the Portuguese students indicated that they needed better computer equipment, writing skills and a
dedicated study space. About one quarter of these students reported they need better skills in the following areas: time
management, computer and English Language skills, as well as needing to have learning goals and objectives. Having a
better Internet connection and the need to develop a study plan was shared by approximately one third of these
students. Finally, the highest rated prerequisite for these Portuguese students was to be more motivated. Few of the
Ukraine students felt that they needed better computer equipment or skills, a dedicated study space or a better Internet
connection at home. Their concerns focused on their behaviors as students since half or a little more than half felt they
needed to be more motivated, have learning objectives and goals, a study plan and

Table 3 Reasons to enroll in distance education courses (More than one could be chosen)
Country Other It is less I can enroll in the I have more I don’t have to
expensive programs that options travel to school
I really want when selecting
courses
and/or a college
Portugal 1.82 5.45 9.09 12.73 20.00
Ukraine 0.00 20.00 32.86 51.43 51.43
UAE 2.11 21.05 27.37 29.47 45.26

Table 4 Reasons to enroll in distance education courses (More than one could be chosen)
Country I can work at I can manage my I can save time by I can manage my
my own pace own study time studying from a own class time
location I choose
Portugal 36.36 38.18 40.00 45.45
Ukraine 67.14 64.29 54.29 55.71
UAE 47.37 48.42 48.42 54.74
better management skills. About one third of these students also reported that they needed better English language
skills.
The UAE students were less confident than the Ukraine students about computer
skills and needing better equipment and a better Internet connection at home. Almost
half of these UAE students reported their need for a study plan and motivation as their
most pressing needs. Better management and English language skills were recorded by
about one third of the students. One quarter of the UAE students felt they needed better writing skills and a dedicated
study space.
Table 9 shows students’ interest in enrolling in DE courses. Almost one quarter of the Ukraine students are Extremely
interested in taking DE courses and almost half are Some what interested. This contrasts with the students from
Portugal who indicated that only 5% are Extremely interested and almost a quarter Somewhat interested. The UAE
students’ interest in enrolling fell in between the students from the two other countries. One fifth to almost one third of
all three groups were Neutral/Unable to judge. About one tenth of students from Ukraine reported Not being very
interested or Not at all interested which contrasts with the Portuguese and UAE students whose numbers were about
one half and one quarter respectively. Tables 10 and 11 show the types of DE that the students were interested in trying.
Portuguese students favored Open schedule courses, followed by Blended learning and Synchronous. Few of these
students were interested in MOOCs and Asynchronous. More than half of the students from Ukraine were interested in
MOOCs and Blended learning followed by Open schedule. About one third of these students were interested in
Synchronous and Asynchronous. UAE students most popular formats were Open schedule and Blended learning
followed by Synchronous and Asynchronous. There was little interest in MOOCs by the UAE students. Few Portuguese
and Ukraine students indicated that they would not take a DE course, however, almost a quarter of the UAE students
indicated this.

Table 5 Reasons to not enroll in distance education courses (More than one could be chosen)
Country It is too I do not have I would I would have I do not I would
expensive constant, feel very difficulty getting know miss
reliable isolated accreditation enough campus
access to for about life
technology the course distance
education
courses
Portugal 1.82 7.27 10.91 10.91 12.73 25.45
Ukraine 0.00 2.86 8.57 27.14 21.43 28.57
UAE 1.05 15.79 17.89 21.05 28.42 31.58

Table 6 Reasons to not enroll in distance education courses (More than one could be chosen)
Country I would have I would have It would be I would have I prefer face
difficulty difficulty difficult for me to difficulty getting to face to
contacting interacting stay motivated immediate face classes
the instructors with peers feedback
Portugal 27.27 30.91 30.91 32.73 52.73
Ukraine 28.57 21.43 65.71 24.29 14.29
UAE 32.63 36.84 41.05 47.37 55.79

Discussion

Data indicates close to a 100% of the UAE residents use the Internet at home or on their mobile devices (Knoema, 2018).
By contrast a smaller percentage of individuals use the Internet in Portugal and the Ukraine (Infographics, 2019).
Internet use in each country does not seem to greatly impact UAE students’ opinions regarding DE. Students’
perceptions of DE vary across the participants from the three countries. Portuguese and Ukrainian students rated DE
more favorably than UAE students. Half of the Ukrainian students have experience with DE which might account for
their avorable attitude. In contrast, in Portugal only a very small percentage of the students had experience. However,
this does not seem to have negatively influenced their attitude towards DE. The interest level and engagement with new
technologies by Portuguese students may help explain the favorable perception the participants had toward DE. A study
by Costa, Faria, and Neto (2018) found that 90% of Portuguese students use new technologies and 69% of them use new
technologies more than an hour and ahalf a day. Based on three European studies, Diário de Noticias (2011) stated that
Portuguese students “appear at the forefront of those who best master information and communication technologies
(ICT).” (para.1) Another factor influencing respondents might be that currently, and for the first time, the Portuguese
government has passed a law that will regulate DE in the country. This new law will open the possibility for other IHEs to
provide DE courses that lead to a degree. Ukrainian students reported a high level of confidence in operating
technological de vices. The reason for this may be, in part, because of state educational requirements. Since the end of
the 1990s, all Ukrainian students in secondary schools have at least one computer course as a mandatory element of
their curriculum. This course covers a wide range of issues, which vary from information society theory to applied
aspects of computer usage. Among the seven learning goals of this course three address digital

Table 7 Preparation students feel they need before enrolling in distance education courses (More
than one could be chosen)
Country I would need I would need I would need a I would need to I would need
better computer better writing dedicated study have learning better
equipment skills space objectives and time
goals management
skills
Portugal 14.55 14.55 25.45 25.45
Ukraine 5.71 7.14 12.86 57.14 50.00
UAE 16.84 25.26 25.26 27.37 32.63

Table 8 Preparation students feel they need before enrolling in distance education courses (More
than one could be chosen)
Country I would need I would need I would need a I would need to I would need
better better better develop a study to be more
computer skills language skills Internet plan motivated
(mainly English) connection
at home
Portugal 27.27 27.27 30.91 34.55 38.18
Ukraine 5.71 35.71 8.57 50.00 58.57
UAE 35.79 36.84 38.95 44.21 45.26

literacy (Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine, 2017). Ukrainian students who responded to the survey have
taken computer courses for at least 5 years. In the UAE, most DE courses and programs are not accredited by the
Ministry of Education (United Arab Emirates Ministry of Education, 2016), which may account for UAE students lack of
experience and their inability to judge this type of instruction. It is worth analyzing the reasons why students enrolled or
would enroll in DE courses. The reasons for taking DE courses, such as time management issues, are sup ported by
studies concerning self regulation and higher retention rates (Bradley, Browne, & Kelley, 2017; Peck, Stefaniak, & Shah,
2018). Students’ interest in having more control of their study time is also mentioned as one of the primary benefits of
DE (Alahmari, 2017; Lei & Gupta, 2010). Regarding the reasons for not enrolling in DE courses, participants from the
three countries mentioned difficulty contacting instructors and peers. Also, more than half of the students in Portugal
and the UAE indicated they preferred face-to-face classes. Most students have spent their entire academic lives in
traditional classes where interaction and immediate feedback from instructors and peers are more common. These
concerns may be why students perceive they would lose a familiar type of interaction and have to engage with
classroom participants in a new and different way (Carver & Kosloski Jr., 2015; Morris & Clark, 2018; Robinson &
Hullinger, 2008; Summers, Waigandt, & Whittaker, 2005). It should be noted that the Portuguese and UAE students
were enrolled in teacher education programs and are training to be face to face teachers. They may not understand the
potential of DE for mat and are not preparing or expecting to use DE in their professional careers. Difficulty being
motivated was another reason chosen by the participants of the three countries to not enroll in DE courses. The lack of
experience in this type of educational format may help explain student lack of confidence with their ability to study and
stay on task. This response contrasts with the reasons reported for enrolling in DE courses such as controlling their study
time. On one hand, participants like the prospect of having the ability to manage their own time. On the other hand,
they are concerned they may lack the discipline they need to be successful.

Table 9 Interest in enrolling in a distance education course

Country Not at all Not very Neutral/ Unable Somewhat Extremely
interested interested to judge interested interested
 Portugal 18.18 29.09 25.45 21.82 5.45
Ukraine 4.29 7.14 21.43 44.29 22.86
UAE 14.74 10.53 31.58 25.26 17.89

Table 10 Types of distance education interested in trying (More than one could be chosen)
Country MOOC (Massive I would not take Asynchronous (Students and
Online Open a distance course instructor do not meet at the
Courses – a free same time online. All course
course available work is done online.)
on the Internet
to a very large
number of
people)
Portugal 90.9 10.91 12.73
Ukraine 54.29 1.43 30.00
UAE 8.42 22.11 24.21

Although the literature indicates that access to technology, isolation and expense are reasons frequently cited as
preventing students from enrolling in DE courses (Lei & Gupta, 2010; Venter, 2003; Zuhairi et al., 2006), these reasons
were selected by a very small percentage of the participants of this study. Access and affordability of technology has
rapidly increased over the last decade which may help explain this inconsistency. Students may understand that DE
courses are now less expensive than traditional university courses (Piletic, 2018) and they do not cite this as a reason for
not enrolling. Relatively few students indicated they would feel isolated. Since this generation is inconstant
communication using technology (Diário de Notícias, 2011) they may not associate DE learning with isolation. However,
it is interesting to note that there was a greater concern for interacting with instructors and peers than isolation. The
Ukrainian students are the most receptive to enrolling in DE courses. This is consistent with their positive perception of
this type of learning. In addition, the previous experience of half of the participants may influence their interest as well
as encourage their peers’ receptivity. UAE students do not have much experience and fewer than half are open to
enrolling in DE courses. This may be due to their lack of experience and other concerns previously mentioned. Only one
third of the Portuguese participants indicated their interest in enrolling in DE courses. This is in contrast with almost two
thirds saying they had a favorable or very favorable attitude. The reasons for this inconsistency are not evident. In terms
of preparation needed to take DE courses, technical concerns were less of an issue for the participants of all three
countries than skills and behaviors. Most participants’ answers focused on student skills including computer, English
language and management. Behaviors such as developing a study plan, having learning goals and objectives and being
more motivated were also mentioned. The perceived need for better English language skills was expressed by about one
third of the participants, none of whom have English as their native language. English speaking countries have been
dominant in DE making English the most commonly used language in online

Table 11 Types of distance education interested in trying (More than one could be chosen)
Country Synchronous (Students Blended learning (Some Open schedule (Students
and instructor meet at classes are taken online study
the same time online) others face to face on on their own time
campus) schedule)
 Portugal 25.45% 29.09% 61.82%
Ukraine 30.00% 52.86% 45.71%
UAE 31.58% 42.11% 42.11%

learning (Sadykova & Dautermann, 2009). Regarding time management, half of the Ukrainian students expressed their
need for improvement in contrast to approximately one third of the participants from the other countries. The
difference among responses may be because the Ukrainian students are more self reflective, or the others are more
disciplined. Although both DE and face to face courses have deadlines for tasks and assessments, in the face to face
courses, students meet in person with their instructors who may support and press them to do their work. Lack of
contact may account for the participants feeling they need to improve these skills when taking DE courses (De Paepe et
al., 2018). Students expressed concerns about lacking certain skills and having certain behaviors that would lead them to
be reluctant to enroll in DE courses. The need for help and preparation are some of the concerns that participants
reported. Perceived needs may account for the students’ apprehensions regarding taking DE courses. To promote this
type of instruction, IHEs could address students’ concerns (Mahlangu, 2018). Open schedule and blended learning
courses were the two preferred formats stated by the participants. The reason that Open schedule is the most popular
may be that it provides more freedom than other types of courses. Blended learning offers the familiar
face to face instruction and some of the conveniences of DE which may be why participants are interested in this model.
Studies regarding the use of MOOCs in all three countries have been conducted indicating that researchers I locations
are aware that this course format is of potential interest to local students (Eppard & Reddy, 2017; Gallacher, 2014;
Gonçalves, Chumbo, Torres, & Gonçalves, 2016; Sharov, Liapunova, & Sharova, 2019; Strutynska & Umryk, 2016).
Ukrainian students selected MOOCs much more than students in the other countries. The reason for this may be that
these students are more knowledgeable about MOOCs, because this type of course is usually at no cost and/or offered
by prestigious IHEs (Cormier et al., 2010). However, this study did not ask why students were interested in MOOCs or
other types of DE courses.

Limitations and future research

While this study offers useful information regarding undergraduate students’ perception and receptivity in taking DE
courses, it has limited generalizability because of the size of the sample and the type of statistical analysis performed.
Participants from two of the countries were enrolled in teacher education programs and were primarily female, thus
future studies would benefit from including more students in diverse programs and a more equitable gender
distribution. Since many IHEs also offer programs for graduate students it would be useful to survey these students
about their opinion and availability to enroll in DE courses. This would provide additional information for IHEs that are
interested in developing DE programs. There were some inconsistencies in the students’ responses such as Portuguese
students’ interest in enrolling in DE courses not matching their favorable/ very favorable attitude towards DE. It would
be helpful to conduct future research regarding this and other inconsistencies.

A study is currently being planned to collect data that will provide a larger and diverse sample and include additional
IHEs. This future research will potentially in crease the available knowledge on how to provide DE for a greater number
of students.

Conclusion and recommendations

Further development of DE courses and programs at IHEs in countries such as Portugal, UAE and Ukraine have good
prospects. The students’ primary concerns regarding taking DE courses were similar among the three countries. These
concerns included time management, motivation, and English language skills. However, this did not totally diminish
participants interest in taking online courses especially for the Ukrainian students.

Based on this research, there are some obstacles that can be addressed to support the expansion of DE in the three
countries that were studied and in other countries. The following recommendations may assist IHEs in promoting DE.

Recommendations for preparation within IHEs

IHEs can take proactive steps to prepare DE offerings, however, a onesize fit all model
may not be appropriate for all countries and IHEs. Each institution needs to develop
their own plan that meets the needs of their students and faculty. Data from this pilot
study and the literature (Elbaum, McIntyre, & Smith, 2002; Hashim & Tasir, 2014; Hux
et al., 2018) suggest that following steps might be taken:

 Assess readiness to take DE courses through a survey and have students speak withcounselors.
 Provide preDE courses to build skills and behaviors based on students’ concerns.
 Train instructors to develop and deliver DE courses that help to overcomeobstacles such as motivation and time
management.
 Offer courses in a blended learning format to familiarize students with onlinelearning which may provide a
transitional model.

Recommendations for IHE outreach

This study shows that there is some student interest in enrolling in online courses.
It is not sufficient for IHEs to make changes internally within their own institution.
IHEs need to develop external strategies and actions that help advance the development of DE:

 Promote DE in social media to target potential students and encourage them to

take courses.
 Urge government agencies to accredit DE courses and programs.

This pilot study provides some background information that may help IHEs to offer DE courses. Additional research
about students’ preferences and needs regarding DE should be conducted. The sample size, IHEs included and
participating countries could be expanded in order to gain a greater understanding.
cultural characteristics need to be taken into account in the development of online courses and programs. DE is being
increasingly included by IHEs all around the world. To stay current, universities will need to find ways to offer DE to their
current and prospective students.

Appendix

Online Survey Questions

1. If the students have taken any distance education courses previously and if yes,how many;
2. What are the students’ perceptions of distance education;
3. What are the reasons students would enroll in distance education courses;
4. What are the reasons students would not enroll in a distance education course;
5. What preparation do students feel they need before taking distance education
courses;
6. What is the level of students’ interest towards enrolling in distance education
courses;
7. What types of distance education would students be interested in trying;
8. What is the students’ age;
9. What is the students’ gender;
10. How confident do students feel using a computer and the Internet.

References
Aharony, N., & BarIlan, J. (2016). Students’ perceptions on MOOCs: An exploratory study. Interdisciplinary Journal of
eSkills and
Life Long Learning, 12, 145–162 Retrieved from
http://www.ijello.org/Volume12/IJELLv12p145162Aharony2631.pdf.
Alahmari, A. (2017). The state of distance education in Saudi Arabia. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 18(2),
91–98.
Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2017). Digital Learning Compass: Distance Education Enrollment Report 2017. Retrieved
from https://
files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED580868.pdf
Ary, D., Jacobs, L. C., Sorensen, C. K., & Walker, D. A. (2010). Introduction to research in education. Belmont:
Wadsworth.
Bradley, R., Browne, B., & Kelley, H. (2017). Examining the influence of selfefficacy and selfregulation in online
learning.
College Student Journal, 51(4), 518–530.
Campus Explorer. (2019). Different Types of Distance Learning. Retrieved from:
https://www.campusexplorer.com/college
advicetips/7021E31E/DifferentTypesofDistanceLearning/
Carver, D. L., & Kosloski Jr., M. F. (2015). Analysis of student perceptions of the psychosocial learning environment in
online
and facetoface career and technical education courses. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 16(4), 7–21
Retrieved
from https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1056&context=stemps_etds.
Communications Department of the Secretariat of the CMU. (2019). Oleksiy Honcharuk: National Digital Literacy
Platform
“Diia: Digital Education” will be launched on January 21. Retrieved February 24, 2020, from Government Portal
website:
https://www.kmu.gov.ua/en/news/oleksijgoncharuknacionalnaosvitnyaplatformazcifrovoyigramotnostidiyacifrova
osvitastartuyevzhe21sichnya
Cormier, D., McAuley, A., Siemens, G., & Stewart, B. (2010, December 8). What is a MOOC? [Video file]. Retrieved
from http://
www.youtube.com/watch?v=eW3gMGqcZQc
Costa, I. P. E., Faria, H. d. C., & Neto, A. S. (2018). Habits of use of new technologies in children and young people.
Gazeta
Médica, 5(4) Retrieved from doi: 10.29315/gm.v5i4.214.
Daniels, C., & Feather, S. R. (2002). Student perceptions of online learning: A comparison of two different
populations. In
Proceedings of the Conference on Information Systems Applied Research, USA Retrieved from
https://docplayer.net/729469
Studentperceptionsofonlinelearningacomparisonoftwodifferentpopulations.html.
De Paepe, L., Zhu, C., & Depryck, K. (2018). Online Dutch L2 learning in adult education: Educators’ and providers’
viewpoints
on needs, advantages and disadvantages. Open Learning, 33(1), 18–33.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02680513.2017.1414586.
Diário de Notícias (2011, August 10). Jovens portugueses são líderes das novas tecnologias. Diário de Notícias
[Online].
Retrieved from https://www.dn.pt/ciencia/tecnologia/interior/jovensportuguesessaolideresdasnovastecnologias194
9445.html
Dobbs, R., del Carmen, A., & WaidLindberg, C. (2017). Students’ perceptions of online courses: The effect of online
course
experience. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 18(1), 98–109 Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?
id=EJ864039.
Elbaum, B., McIntyre, C., & Smith, A. (2002). Essential elements: Prepare, design, and teach your online course.
Madison: Atwood
Publishing.
Eppard, J., & Reddy, P. (2017). Localizing content for an XMOOC in the UAE. In 14th international conference on
cognition and
exploratory learning in the digital age, CELDA 2017, (pp. 329–330).
Fidalgo, P. (2012). Learning Networks and Moodle Use in Online Courses: A Social Network Analysis Study.
Universidade Nova
de Lisboa.
Federal Competitiveness and Statistics Authority. (2017). Information and communications technology (ICT) UAE
data.
Retrieved from FCSA UAE Numbers Portal website: https://uaenumbers.fcsa.gov.ae/UAEICT2018/informationand
communicationstechnologyict
Gallacher, D. (2014). Navigating the impending MOOC storm in middle eastern higher education. In 8th International
Technology, Education and Development Conference, 6522–6531. Valencia: IATED.
Garrison, D. R. (2000). Theoretical challenges for distance education in the 21st century: A shift from structural to
transactional
issues. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 1(1), 1–17 Retrieved from
http://www.irrodl.
org/index.php/irrodl/article/viewArticle/2.
Garrison, D. R., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education.
The Inernet
and Higher Education, 7(2), 95–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2004.02.001.
Global Media Insight. (2020). United Arab Emirates Population Statistics (2020). Retrieved January 28, 2020, from
https://www.
globalmediainsight.com/blog/uaepopulationstatistics/
Gonçalves, V., Chumbo, I., Torres, E., & Gonçalves, B. (2016). Teacher education through Mooc: A case study. In
ICERI2016
Proceedings, (pp. 8350–8358). https://doi.org/10.21125/iceri.2016.090.
Gunawardena, C., McIsaac, M., & Jonassen, D. (2008). Distance education. In D. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of
research on
educational communications and technology: Project of the Association for Educational Communications and
Technology
(AECT series), (pp. 355–396). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc. Retrieved from
http://ocw.metu.edu.tr/file.
php/118/Week10/GunawardenaMcIsaacdistanceed.pdf.
Hannay, M., & Newvine, T. (2006). Perceptions of distance learning: A comparison of online and traditional learning.
MERLOT
Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 2(1), 1–11 Retrieved from http://jolt.merlot.org/documents/MS05011.pdf.
Hashim, H., & Tasir, Z. (2014). Elearning readiness: A literature review. In Proceedings 2014 international conference
on
teaching and learning in computing and engineering, LATICE 2014, (pp. 267–271).
https://doi.org/10.1109/LaTiCE.2014.58.
Horspool, A., & Lange, C. (2012). Applying the scholarship of teaching and learning: Student perceptions, behaviours
and
success online and facetoface. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 17(1), 73–88 Retrieved from
https://srhe.
tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02602938.2010.496532#.XXXPigzZPY.
Hux, A., Nichols, C., Nichols, J., Henley, J., McBride, J., Bradley, M. J., & Hux, R. (2018). Orientation, preparation, and
support of online
adjunct Faculty for Online Course Delivery: Developing, Conducting and financing a weekend. In Society for
Information
Technology & Teacher Education International Conference Retrieved from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/182728/.
Infographics, S. M. M. (2019). UAE internet statistics 2019 (Infographics). Retrieved February 25, 2020, from GMI
blogger
website: https://www.globalmediainsight.com/blog/uaeinternetandsocialmediausagestatistics/
Instituto Nacional de Estatistica. (2019). 80% dos utilizadores de internet participam em redes sociais. Retrieved
January 19,
2020, from Sociedade da Informação e do Conhecimento website: https://www.ine.pt/xportal/xmain?
xpid=INE&xpgid=
ine_pesquisa&frm_accao=PESQUISAR&frm_show_page_num=1&frm_modo_pesquisa=PESQUISA_SIMPLES&frm_te
xto=
Inquérito+à+utilização+de+tecnologias+de+informação+e+comunicação+pelas+famílias&frm_modo_texto=MODO_
TEXTO_AL
Johnson, R. B., & Christensen, L. (2014). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative and mixed approaches.
Thousand Oaks:
Sage.
Keegan, D. (1994). The competitive advantages of distance teaching universities. Open Learning: The Journal of
Open, Distance
and eLearning, 9(2), 36–39. https://doi.org/10.1080/0268051940090206.
Keegan, D. (2002). The future of learning: From eLearning to mLearning. Hagen: Zentrales Institut fur Fern
Universitat Retrieved
from https://www.academia.edu/3442041/The_future_of_learning_From_eLearning_to_mLearning.
Keegan, D. J. (1980). On the Nature of Distance Education. ZIFF Papiere 33. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?
q=Desmond+
keegan&id=ED311890
Knoema. (2018). No Emirados Árabes Share of households with InternetTitle. Retrieved February 24, 2020, from
Atlas
mundial de dados website: https://pt.knoema.com/atlas/EmiradosÁrabes/topics/Telecomunicação/
Usuáriosdeinternet/
ShareofhouseholdswithInternet
Kurt, S. C., & Yildirim, B. (2018). The students’ perceptions on blended learning: A Q method analysis. Educational
Sciences:
Theory & Practice, 18(2), 427–446 Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1201838.
Lanier, M. M. (2006). Academic integrity and distance learning. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 17(2), 244–261
Retrieved
from https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10511250600866166.
Lei, S. A., & Gupta, R. K. (2010). College distance education courses: Evaluating benefits and costs from institutional,
faculty
and students’ perspectives. Education, 130(4), 616–631 Retrieved from
https://www.questia.com/library/journal/1G12275
97132/collegedistanceeducationcoursesevaluatingbenefits.
Mahlangu, V. P. (2018). The good, the bad, and the ugly of distance learning in higher education. In M. Sinecen (Ed.),
Trends
in Elearning. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.75702.
Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine. (2017). Програма курсу “Інформатика” для 5–9 класів
загальноосвітніх
навчальних закладів [Program of the Course “Informatics” for Grades 5–9 of Secondary Schools]. Retrieved
February 24,
2020, from https://mon.gov.ua/storage/app/media/zagalna
serednya/programy59klas/onovlennya122017/programa
informatika59traven2015.pdf
Morris, P. D., & Clark, L. M. (2018). Using NSSE data to analyze levels of engagement of distance learners. Quarterly
Review of
Distance Education, 19(2), 1–13 Retrieved from
https://www.questia.com/library/journal/1P42166326369/usingnssedata
toanalyzelevelsofengagementof.
Nakamura, M. (2017). The state of distance education in Japan. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 18(3), 75–
87.
Peck, L., Stefaniak, J. E., & Shah, S. J. (2018). The correlation of selfregulation and motivation with retention and
attrition in
distance education. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 19(3), 1–16.
Perraton, H. (2008). Open and distance learning in the developing world. New York: Routledge.
Piletic, P. (2018). Lower costs are making more students prefer online education. Retrieved February 11, 2020, from
eLearning
industry website: https://elearningindustry.com/studentspreferonlineeducationlowercostsmaking
PORDATA Base de Dados Portugal Contemporâneo. (2017). Indivíduos com 16 e mais anos que utilizam computador
e
Internet. Retrieved January 19, 2020, from Ciência, Tecnologia e Sociedade da Informação website:
https://www.pordata.
pt/DB/Portugal/Ambiente+de+Consulta/Tabela
Robinson, C. C., & Hullinger, H. (2008). New benchmarks in higher education: Student engagement in online
learning. Journal
of Education for Business, 84(2), 101–109 Retrieved from
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.3200/JOEB.84.2.101109.
Sadykova, G., & Dautermann, J. (2009). Crossing cultures and borders in international online distance higher
education.
Journal of Asynchronous Learning Network, 13(2), 89–114. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v13i2.1670.
Seok, S., DaCosta, B., Kinsell, C., & Tung, C. K. (2010b). Comparison of instructor’ and students’ perceptions of the
effectiveness
of online courses. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 11(1), 25.
Seok, S., DaCosta, R., Kinsell, C., & Tung, C. (2010a). Comparison of instructors’ and students’ perceptions of the
effectiveness
of online courses. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 12(1), 25–36 Retrieved from
http://online.nuc.edu/ctl_en/
wpcontent/uploads/2015/08/Onlineeducationeffectiviness.pdf.
Sharov, S., Liapunova, V., & Sharova, T. (2019). Analysis of the opportunities of the prometheus platform for the
professional
development of future teachers. TEM Journal, 8(4), 1469–1476. https://doi.org/10.18421/TEM8452.
Strutynska, O., & Umryk, M. (2016). The use of MOOCs for training of the future computer science teachers in
Ukraine. In S. N.
for U. of S. in K. Editor Eugenia SmyrnovaTrybulska (Ed.), Elearning & Lifelong Learning. Monograph. (pp. 297–320).
KatowiceCieszyn.
Summers, J. J., Waigandt, A., & Whittaker, T. A. (2005). A comparison of student achievement and satisfaction in an
online
versus a traditional facetoface statistics class. Innovative Higher Education, 29(3), 233–250 Retrieved from
https://link.
springer.com/article/10.1007/s107550051938x.
The Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine. (2019). Презентація першого в Україні дослідження з цифрової грамотності
населення [Presentation of the First Digital Literacy Survey in Ukraine]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/
watch?v=t3ghLyjzqLM&feature=youtu.be
The State Statistics Service of Ukraine. (2019). Communication Subscribers as of January 1. Retrieved February 24,
2020, from
http://www.ukrstat.gov.ua/operativ/operativ2019/zv/az/az_e/az0119_e.htm
Tseng, H., & Walsh Jr., E. J. (2016). Blended versus traditional course delivery: Comparing students’ motivation,
learning
outcomes, and preferences. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 17(1), 43–52.
United Arab Emirates Ministry of Education. (2016). Higher Education emphasizes the need to check accredited
elearning
universities list. Retrieved September 16, 2019, from
https://www.moe.gov.ae/En/MediaCenter/archive/mohesr/news/
Pages/HigherEducationemphasizestheneedtocheckaccreditedelearninguniversitieslist.aspx
Venter, K. (2003). Coping with isolation: The role of culture in adult distance learners’ use of surrogates. Open
Learning, 18(3),
271–287 Retrieved from https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0268051032000131035.
Watts, L. (2016). Synchronous and asynchronous communication in distance learning: A review of the literature.
Quarterly
Review of Distance Education, 17(1), 23–32.
ZawackiRichter, O., & Naidu, S. (2016). Mapping research trends from 35 years of publications in distance education.
Distance
Education, 37(3), 245–269. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2016.1185079.
Zuhairi, A., Wahyono, E., & Suratinah, S. (2006). The historical context, current development, and future challenges
of distance
education in Indonesia. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 7(1), 95–101 Retrieved from
https://www.questia.com/
library/journal/1P31040201321/thehistoricalcontextcurrentdevelopmentandfuture.