WHICH IS BETTER: CONVENTIONAL EDUCATION OR DISTANCE EDUCATION?

Abstract

This paper is an attempt at comparing conventional education and distance education as alternative learning methods. The study was motivated by the growing debate among student groups and employers as to whether or not the distance learning approach backed by technology is better than the regular traditional approach. The aim of the paper is to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of both learning models in order to better harness them for better student achievement and education attainment. The paper discovers that the conventional education method holds advantage in providing physical contact between the learners and the instructors which allows room for deeper explanation of course content and feedback, student to student interaction and execution of team projects and experiments. However, this method was found to be more expensive and rigid and, in many cases, overstretching the instructors by crowding too many students in a class thereby diminishing the per-capita learning output. The distance learning method was found to be more flexible and less expensive in terms of financial and time costs, offering the learner room for choice of work schedule. Despite their individual differences, the study found that both distance education and conventional education methods share the same goals and ability to produce significant impact in teaching and learning. The paper therefore recommends a national master plan to optimally galvanize the two learning approaches in a way that will allow both models to remain singularly effective and mutually reinforcing in delivering quality learning.