The No Significant Difference (NSD) Phenomenon is a research bibliography by Thomas L. Russell compiling several previously published works by numerous authors studying the differences in distance learning as opposed to face-to-face (f2f) learning (Russell, 1999). Several of the research findings discovered that there were no major differences between the use of mediums for learning and how they affect student learning and retention. The majority of findings pointed to NSD. In fact some of the previous research statistically showed a Significant Difference (SD) in student learning based on the mode presented such as f2f versus correspondence, radio, closed circuit TV, or computers focusing on the asynchronous aspect of each. Interestingly enough most of the research findings pointing towards SD were in favor of the asynchronous distance learning as a better means for producing greater student performance and retention.

Since near the beginning of the twentieth century and on to today, research conducted comparing distance learning and f2f has been scrutinized by various researchers investigating the differences and similarities. As far back as the 1920s, a study discovered that there was NSD between the college test scores of in-classroom students and their peers enrolled in correspondence courses (Crump, 1928). Although this was one of the first studies conducted on measuring the differences in distance learning and the live classroom experience, it would later show through other research, that these study's findings were not an anomaly but the standard.

As new technologies began to emerge, such as radio and television, educators also began to utilize these modes of communicating to educate the masses. In a research study investigating between radio listeners and those who just read the material, as to whom would have better academic achievements, the findings proved that there was NSD between the two groups (Woelfel & Tyler, 1945). This particular study identified that hearing information via radio was just as robust as reading. Thus, this may have given researchers additional ammunition to usurp the long held belief that students could not learn as well at a distance as they could f2f with the instructor.

Television as a means of communicating, became more prevalent within colleges and universities by implementing the use of this medium specifically as a closed circuit system to be viewed by others from a distance. This of course led to additional studies measuring the impact of closed circuit television and whether there was a significant difference in student's learning as opposed to the traditional mode of learning in a live lecture (Carpenter & Greenhill, 1958). Very much like the other studies showing NSD, this too revealed the same findings between closed circuit and live lecture teaching. Up to this point, there seemed to be no drop-off in student performance using distance learning through a variety of modes. This of course would be a precursor to the findings discovered with the use of computers.

With the advent of computers and then eventually the personal computer, today's learning can now utilize a variety of modes to communicate; all within the computer. With this advancement in technology, the attribute of asynchronous learning received a boost since individuals could simply access a website or open an email on their own time. The use of the Internet also became a tool for teaching allowing students from afar to participate in learning communities that otherwise would not have been there. Several studies have now been conducted on discovering the differences in online studying as opposed to a live lecture, and in some cases a SD was discovered in favor of the online students (Dutton, Dutton & Perry, 1999).

Future research could look into whether there is a SD in dropout rates among distance learners and in-class students as well as trying to identify the reasons. Personally, I have taken online classes before and have either found them to be very boring or just as intellectually challenging and stimulating. It appears that how an instructor delivers the information is just as important as to the medium of choice. In other words it may seem just as easy for a student to fall asleep in class as opposed to falling asleep in front of the computer.

It is easily conceivable to conclude that computers in the use of distance learning can equally perform to the task of educating individuals as the live classroom does. Computers in essence use all of the modes that were present in the previous studies that revealed NSD in distance learning versus f2f. Correspondence learning is today's email, the voice on the radio is now VOIP, and the closed circuit view is now a video stream. As technologies continue to develop, the distance learning mode may eventually outperform the traditional mode of learning. It's certainly more convenient and perhaps may be the reason that more individuals will pursue a higher education.

References:
Russell, T. (1999). The No Significant Difference Phenomenon. Chapel Hill, N.C.: Office of Instructional Communication, North Carolina State University.
Crump, R.E. (1928). Correspondence And Class Extension Work In Oklahoma. Doctoral Dissertation, Teachers College, Columbia University.
Woelfel, N. and Tyler, I.K. (1945). Radio And The School. World Book, Tarrytown-on-Hudson, N.Y.
Carpenter, C. R. & Greenhill, L. P. (1958). An Investigation Of Closed Circuit Television For Teaching University Courses. Pennsylvania State University, Instructional Television Research, Report #2.
Dutton, J., Dutton, M., & Perry, J. (1999). Do Online Students Perform As Well As Traditional Students? North Carolina State University.