Tutoring

Tutoring support can be described as organised interactions between students and teachers during face-to-face tutorials or online. Interactions are regarded as an important element of quality learning environments (Juwah 2006; Garisson & Anderson 2003). Tutoring support is underpinned by Moore’s (1989) student–teacher interactions, one of the three components of

the theory of interactions in DE. Moore (1989) identified three types of interaction, namely student–teacher, student–student and student–content, as a way of addressing transactional distance in DE. Student–teacher interactions are communication between the instructor and the student in a course. Student–student interaction is communication between two or more students in a course. Student–content interaction is a process in which students examine, consider and process the course information presented during the educational experience. These interactions are said to be essential in addressing the interactional gap that is inherent in DE. This section of the study focuses on tutoring (student–teacher interactions).

There are two types of student–teacher interaction in DE institutions: face-to-face tutorials and online tutoring. According to Sukumar et al (2001), more teacher-to-student interactions, similar to those found in traditional instruction, are being incorporated into online programme material. Daweti (2003:7) points out that face-to-face classes should be of the highest quality because they are “an opportunity which is not always offered by DE providers”. Daweti (2003) discovered that these classes contributed to students’ decision to join an education course.

Moenikia et al (2013) investigated the quality of DE support services and its impact on students’ academic achievement using the SERVQUAL dimensions – tangibles, reliability, responsiveness, assurance and empathy. The study involved 476 students from two universities in Tehran and measured the gap between expectations and perceptions using the 22 SERVQUAL questionnaire dimensions. The results showed that face-to-face tutoring was significantly related to DE students’ academic achievement.

Furthermore, a study by Sulcic and Sulcic (2007) found that good quality online tutoring support service can improve part-time students’ study outcomes. Conversely, a study by Bernath et al (2003) found that when online tutorials were introduced at the Center for DE at Carl von Ossietzky University of Oldenburg, in Germany, they could not replace face-to-face tutorials. Another finding was that there was a gap between the expected online tutoring service and the service the students were receiving from their universities. Despite the fact that students were not satisfied with the tutoring service, they still performed better than those who did not attend tutoring lessons.

Price et al (2007) conducted three studies in which they investigated the experiences (perceptions) of students taking a course by DE in which tutoring support was delivered face-to- face and online. The students were asked to compare the two forms of service – online and face- to-face. Quantitative surveys were used in the first two studies and qualitative interviews were held with students in the third study. The results of the three studies showed that students were happier with face-to-face tutoring interactions than they were with online tutoring and in fact reported negatively about online tutoring. The students were expecting pastoral care, whereby the tutor offered them support and encouragement; listened to personal difficulties; and developed a personal relationship with the students. Unfortunately they did not receive the care that they were expecting in online tutoring. Lentell (2003) says that the role of a tutor is “intensive” and personal to each DE student. Therefore, it is not surprising that the students in Price et al’s (2007) study expected a caring online tutor. Moreover, the students wanted the online tutor to use facial expressions, and “use an enthusiastic tone of voice that can even be detected on e-mails” (Price et al 2007:15). Tutors are also expected to provide animation and warmth, and constructive feedback, to the students.

Segoe (2014) also found that DE students need constant tutor support for motivation and success. Furthermore, the participants’ responses in Segoe’s (2014:168) study confirmed that the main responsibility of the tutor in DE is to give guidance to students, clarify issues, provide motivation and encourage “togetherness as peers”.

Another study whose findings on interactions have some similarities with those of Price et al (2007) is a study conducted by Lin, Cranton & Bridglall (2005) in which they examined students’ reactions to DE. The study concluded that the ways in which students interacted with the online medium were consistent with the ways in which they interacted with the face-to-face learning environment.

There could be many reasons for students not liking online interactions. Technophobia theory helps us understand why some students do not like computers. Technophobia or computer phobia is defined as a resistance to, fear of and anxiety towards computers or having hostile thoughts about computers. A survey by Dell Computers on the use of ICT (1993) showed that

more than half of the US population was technophobic. Another study (Gilbert, Lee-Kelly & Barton, 2003) conducted in the UK showed that technology anxiety correlates with demographic variables such as age, gender and academic qualifications. Older people and women are usually regarded as the most fearful when it comes to computers. Despite the increased use of ICT and the Internet in education the world over, there are still people who do not use computers either out of fear or dislike or for some other reasons. The implication of this for DE is that an educational environment such as “cyberspace” can impede learning, making the service performance and delivery inadequate.

Moreover, Kangai, Rupande and Rugonye (2011) conducted a mixed methods study on the quality of student support services to examine the perceptions of 200 students on the quality and effectiveness of guidance and counselling learning support services provided by the ZOU. The results showed that the majority of the students found counselling on tutorials, assignment and delivery of study material ineffective. However, communication and individual counselling on modules were found to be effective.