Available via license: CC BY
Content may be subject to copyright.
Student Success
ISSN: 2205-0795
Volume 10, Issue 2, pp. 1-11
August 2019
Student Success, 10(2) August 2019 | 1
Feature—Consolidated Project Report
Online learning in Australian higher education:
Opportunities, challenges and transformations
Cathy Stone
University of Newcastle, Newcastle, Australia
National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education, Australia
Abstract
Higher education is being rapidly transformed by the growth in online learning, with an increasing
number of universities worldwide offering degree programs in online, distance modes of study. Australian
education has a long history of 'distance education', primarily offered by regional universities. With the
digital communication advances of the 21st century, traditional 'correspondence' study has transformed
into online learning, with many more universities, both metropolitan and regional, offering
undergraduate degree programs that can be completed entirely online. While this can provide a
significant opportunity for further widening of participation in higher education, Australian and
international research indicates that much needs to be done to improve the higher attrition rates
currently associated with online learning. This paper draws on the findings of three separate yet related
Australian research projects, to compare student and staff perspectives on ways to improve outcomes in
online learning.
*This report was presented at the STARS Conference in Melbourne, Australia in July 2019 and was selected for publication in
this special issue. The author has kindly given their permission to have this report published and it has undergone a further
review by the editors to confirm it aligns with the Journal’s submission guidelines and standards.
Please cite this article as:
Stone, C. (2019). Online learning in Australian higher education: Opportunities, challenges and transformations. Student
Success, 10(2). 1-11. doi: 10.5204/ssj.v10i2.1299
Student Success: A journal exploring the experiences of students in tertiary education
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Licence. As an open access journal,
articles are free to use with proper attribution. ISSN: 2205-0795
Online learning in Australian higher education: Opportunities, challenges and transformations
2 | Student Success, 10(2) August 2019
Introduction
As in many other countries, the mode by which
distance education is delivered to students
studying off-campus in Australia, has changed
quite dramatically over the past couple of
decades. What used to be delivered to students
by post, through recorded lectures and hard copy
notes and readings, is now delivered almost
exclusively in an online format via the Internet.
Distance or external students now study ‘online’
rather than ‘by correspondence’. The impact of
being able to deliver education via the Internet
has resulted in changes that are far greater than
simply the mode of delivery. The relative ease
with which learning content can be put online,
coupled with the perception of the reduced cost
of online delivery, when compared with face-to-
face teaching and with printing and posting
materials to students, has resulted in an increase
in online offerings across the higher education
sector. More institutions than ever before are
offering online courses at undergraduate as well
as higher degree levels, and an increasing number
of students are taking up the opportunity to study
in what is seen and marketed as a more flexible
and manageable way to gain qualifications.
Indeed, statistics from the Australian
Government Department of Education and
Training (DET; 2018) show that the number of
students in Australia studying in a
distance/online mode is now rising faster than
those studying on-campus. Not only is this
transforming the way in which institutions plan,
develop and deliver education, it is also
expanding the possibility of higher education to
an increasingly wider student cohort.
Online students are less likely than on-campus
students to be school-leavers, and more likely to
be older, mature-age learners, engaged in regular
ongoing employment, either full or part-time,
with substantial family responsibilities and to be
juggling multiple responsibilities in their lives
(Moore & Greenland, 2017; Signor & Moore,
2014; Stone & O’Shea, 2019). There is evidence
that online learning, particularly at
undergraduate level, is contributing significantly
to the Australian Government’s student equity
agenda, with this cohort containing higher
proportions of students who are first in their
families to study at university level as well as
those from the government-identified higher
education equity categories (DET, 2017a), of low
socio-economic background, regional and remote
students, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
students, and students with a disability (Cardak
et al., 2017; Kent, 2015; Pollard, 2018; Stone,
O’Shea, May, Delahunty, & Partington, 2016;).
However, it is debatable how much of a real
opportunity to achieve a qualification this
provides, when Australian Government data
demonstrates the considerably lower rate of
completion of qualifications by online students
when compared with those studying face-to-face
(DET, 2017b, 2017c). One government study
showed that only 46.6% of external/online
students completed their qualifications over an
eight-year period, compared with 76.6% for
internal, face-to-face students (DET, 2017b),
while another found that online students were 2.5
times more likely than face-to-face students to
withdraw from their studies without a
qualification (DET, 2017c). Clearly, online study
brings with it both opportunities and challenges
for students as well as higher education
institutions. This paper draws on the published
findings of two pieces of Australian research into
the online student experience (O’Shea, Stone &
Delahunty, 2015; Stone et al., 2016) and
compares these with the findings of an Australia-
wide research project conducted in 2016-2017
into the perspectives and experiences of
academic and professional staff involved in online
education. The Final Report of this research
project was published in 2017 by the National
Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education
(NCSEHE; Stone, 2017).
Hearing from the students
Previous Australian research has given voice to
this diverse higher education cohort, allowing us
to hear directly from the students about their
motivations for and experiences of online study;
Stone
Student Success, 10(2) August 2019 | 3
also, their perspectives on what are the key
factors that help them to persist with their
studies. Two such studies (O’Shea et al., 2015;
Stone et al., 2016) surveyed and interviewed a
combined total of 144 online students from a
range of universities across Australia. In both
studies, consistent with the overall population of
online undergraduate students, the majority
were mature-age students, with the largest group
aged between 25 and 50. Key findings common to
both studies are summarised below.
Why study now, and why online?
Reasons for studying were overwhelmingly
related to improving incomes, advancing careers
and generally improving their lives in
instrumental ways. A typical quote is that of
Gemma, aged 42:
I’ve gone as high as I can go at work without a
qualification, so it’s for career advancement and
opportunity I think, because I’d like to change
jobs, but it’s a bit difficult unless you’ve got that
piece of paper (Stone et al., 2016, p. 153).
Students were very clear about their reasons for
choosing to study online, rather than face-to-face
study, stressing the importance of flexibility in
terms of being able to choose where and when to
study, due to the need to fit their studies around
their other pressing responsibilities. For Glenda,
aged 36, “It’s just perfect because I can study at
my own pace and my job gives me the freedom to
study when I want”, while Evan, aged 29, finds he
can “structure the study – to suit my sort of
lifestyle instead of having to make any dramatic
changes to study on campus” (Stone et al., 2016,
p. 155). The word “opportunity” crops up
frequently in the stories of online students:
“there’s never been the opportunity”; “a great
opportunity”; “opportunity plays a big part” (Stone
et al., 2016, p.156).
What helps?
While making it clear that the availability of
online education provided this opportunity for
them to start university, the students also talked
about what they wanted and needed from their
institutions once they had started, to help them to
continue successfully. The two studies revealed a
number of key issues for students, as follows:
1) Inclusion: students wanted to feel included as
equals; to be valued as much as on-campus
students. Many felt that:
online learners were “a lower priority than on-
campus students” … “second fiddle” and … “not
really having a voice” (O’Shea et al., 2015, p. 51).
2) Preparation: they wanted to be prepared for
online study, particularly in understanding the
technology used to deliver their learning:
Even some who regularly used computers in
other settings found learning the technology a
struggle, which impacted upon their motivation,
confidence and perseverance in this domain
(O’Shea et al., 2015, p. 51-52).
3) Communication and connection: a lack of
communication from tutors and the absence of
feedback was particularly frustrating for many.
There was mention of “self-service units”; the
“disappearing lecturer”; “little or no feedback, no
discussion and ‘don’t bother me’ tutors” (O’Shea
et al., 2015, p. 49). Inca, aged 55, reported that:
Sometimes you’d have unusual things happen
where they just seem to disappear after, like by
week 11, week 12 they just don’t come back
(O’Shea et al., 2015, p. 49).
Many spoke about feeling isolated and craving
more of a connection with fellow students and
tutors, with comments such as that by 38-year-
old Tania, “if there’s no connection there with
students, you kind of feel a bit isolated” (O’Shea et
al., 2015, p. 48). The tutor could have a
considerable impact on reducing isolation, as
reflected by 25-year-old Neill’s observation that
“if the tutor’s very active and engaging with
students, generally the students are more willing
to engage with each other” (O’Shea et al., 2015, p.
49).
Online learning in Australian higher education: Opportunities, challenges and transformations
4 | Student Success, 10(2) August 2019
4) Proactive institutional support: isolation could
be alleviated through “being offered and
receiving institutional help and support” (Stone
et al., 2016, p. 160), as the experience of Cory, a
female student aged 30, illustrates:
I got an email … telling me that they were here to
help … uni is hard so give us a call if you ever
want a chat … and then a couple of days later I
thought I’m going to call these guys. It was really
helpful. I had a chat to a woman over the phone
who was really great (Stone et al., 2016, p. 160).
5) Engaging learning design: students were often
disappointed by the poorly designed courses and
materials they were faced with, finding them
difficult to navigate and disengaging. In the words
of Ana, aged 50:
what works in person is not the same as online
… I thought it would be more tailor-made for it
than what it is (O’Shea et al., 2015, p. 52).
Hearing from those who educate and
support online students
The above findings have since been
complemented and extended by a third research
project, funded by the Australian Government
DET, conducted via an Equity Fellowship from the
NCSEHE at Curtin University, Australia and
supported by the Centre of Excellence for Equity
in Higher Education (CEEHE) at the University of
Newcastle, Australia. This research sought the
wisdom and insights of academic and
professional practitioners on ways to improve the
experiences of and outcomes for online students.
What follows is an overview of this research, with
discussion of the consistencies between its key
findings and the student perspectives previously
discussed.
This research was conducted during 2016 and
2017 with staff participants from 15 different
Australian universities, plus the Open University
(OU) in the United Kingdom (UK). The OU was
included because of its history of specialising in
offering distance education, now primarily
online, across the whole of the UK and
internationally. Due to the nature of the ethics
clearance, which assured anonymity for
participants, it was not possible within this
research to explicitly compare and contrast
practices at the OU with practices at other
Australian universities, as related by participants.
However, where there was published material to
draw on, examples of effective practices at
participating universities, including the OU, are
mentioned within this paper, with the Final
Report containing further information (Stone,
2017).
Qualitative interviews of around 45 to 60
minutes, mostly face-to-face and occasionally by
telephone, were conducted with 151 members of
academic, professional, administrative and
managerial staff, involved in online education
across the 16 institutions. Participants came from
a very broad range of areas and disciplines. The
proportion of academic to professional staff was
fairly evenly divided: 70 participants were
academics, representing all or almost all
disciplines, schools and faculties at each of the
institutions; 75 were professional staff members
from many different areas such as library, student
services (including student engagement,
retention, success and support), academic skills,
equity, learning design, educational technology,
planning, policy, data; and six were in senior
executive roles.
A semi-structured questionnaire with open-
ended questions sought information about each
participant’s role, the extent and type of
involvement they had in online education, their
familiarity with and understanding of the online
student cohort, the types of practices and
interventions they were using and whether any of
these had or were being evaluated. For example,
they were asked about “any interventions or
strategies that you use, or any that you are aware
of others using, which are having a positive effect
on student engagement, retention and/or student
academic success” and, in their experience, “what
other types of interventions and practices are
important in helping online students stay and
succeed”.
Stone
Student Success, 10(2) August 2019 | 5
The Final Report from the research (Stone, 2017)
outlines seven key findings. In comparing these
findings with those of the two studies previously
discussed, strong consistencies can be seen
between the view of staff and the view of students
about what is most helpful for students in the
online environment. It seems that experienced
staff have come to understand well what students
need, even if institutions are not always meeting
these needs. These seven findings and their close
relationship with student perspectives are
discussed below. Quotes are drawn directly from
the research data unless otherwise attributed.
1. Strategic whole-of-institution
approach
Similar to students’ perceptions of being ‘a lower
priority’, or ‘second fiddle’ to on-campus
students, many staff talked about their frustration
that online students were being “treated as kind
of like the poor cousin” (Unit Coordinator) or
“getting a lesser experience” (Lecturer) and that
online education was regarded by the institution
as “secondary education”. For casual teaching
staff in particular, there was a sense that they
were regarded as “a second-class academic”
(Casual Lecturer), being paid insufficient hours
and receiving no access to paid staff development
and training. Many emphasised the need for the
university as a whole to recognise and treat
online education as core business, rather than an
add-on. This included establishing quality
standards for online education, subject to
ongoing continuous improvement, as well as
understanding the nature and diversity of the
online student cohort, in terms of both its
strengths and its needs. On the one hand online
students tend to be older and in paid
employment, therefore more experienced and
mature in many important ways: “they’re really
conscientious students” (Senior Academic); but,
on the other hand, they can be in need of extra
support due to various challenges in their busy
lives; “it’s the extra ball that gets thrown up in the
air and the first one they’ll drop if things get
tough” (Course Coordinator). There was also
awareness of the higher proportions of students
from equity categories, such as those with
disability: “students that are incapacitated in
some way” (Lecturer); and those from remote
areas who have “difficulty often with internet
access” (Student Advisor).
2. Intervene early, to connect and
prepare
Similar to students’ views about the importance
of being adequately prepared for their online
studies, staff were clear that connecting with
students early, offering orientation and
preparation, was vital to their future success. Staff
talked of the need to help students develop “a
realistic understanding of what it’s going to be
like” (Project Coordinator) and the perils of
adopting a “one-size-fits-all sales approach”
(Student Counsellor). One senior manager in
student services talked of the need for “a greater
emphasis at the front end”; while a Senior
Lecturer talked of providing new online students
with “a highly scaffolded entry into the online
environment”. Connecting early with students in
more personal ways such as phone calls was seen
to help develop “a sense of belonging because
they’d spoken to someone that they felt knew
them” (Library Manager). There were examples
of outreach orientation programs for online
students in one regional university having “a
team that travels to select locations around
Australia … we literally jump in our cars and go
and visit students” (Student Engagement
Director), as well as strategies such as “the
welcome campaign, from O-week through to
Week Three, dialling out, having a conversation”
(Student Support Manager). Preparing students
academically was raised as a key issue, with some
universities offering free preparatory units and
modules online to try to “get them to a place
where they’re comfortable being in an academic
environment” (Course Coordinator).
3. The vital role of ‘teacher-presence’
Consistent with students’ desire for
communication and connection, the importance
of lecturer or tutor communication came across
Online learning in Australian higher education: Opportunities, challenges and transformations
6 | Student Success, 10(2) August 2019
very strongly from staff, with “someone at the
other end of the system listening to them …
communication and feedback … you can’t
communicate enough with online students”
(Senior Lecturer). Staff participants were
confident that regular and constructive teacher-
student communication improves student
retention. “When there’s no responses to emails
and no responses to discussion forums … the
attrition rate’s higher and the students are really
unhappy” (Unit Coordinator). There was also a
recognition of the different demands on tutors
and lecturers when teaching online. “The
engagement demands are completely different,
the reliance of students on the instructor is much
more intensive – basically you’re it” (Course
Coordinator). Experienced online teachers were
very clear about the need for prompt and regular
responses with many being “online every day”
and putting “a little about myself often into the
emails” (Lecturer); also using different media to
communicate, including discussion forums,
emails and at times telephone. “Phone is really
important … if you need to resolve things in some
way … phone is helpful for breaking the IT barrier
down a little bit” (Lecturer).
The importance of communication and feedback
from online teachers has been highlighted in
other research studies (Delahunty, Verenikina, &
Jones, 2014; Kuiper, 2015; Lambrinidis, 2014)
with Ragusa and Crampton (2018), for example,
finding that “the quality and timeliness of lecturer
feedback was the most valued form of learning
connection identified by students irrespective of
course” (p.15). One of the difficulties for
experienced, dedicated online teachers was a lack
of recognition from within their institutions of the
time it takes to engage and support online
students effectively:
It’s very time-consuming and tutors aren’t paid
for it, for that amount of time. We’re not supposed
to spend a lot of time on it. You’re always chasing
your tail because there’s just not enough time
(Lecturer).
4. Design for online
There was a strong understanding amongst the
staff participants that, “practices such as
recording face-to-face lectures and uploading
them for online students, rather than providing
specifically designed online content, provides a
disengaging experience”. In the words of one
lecturer, online learning is “a different animal to
the face-to-face course … it needs to be designed
completely differently for that mode of delivery”.
This supports findings from other research
(Devlin, 2013; Mayes, Ku, Akarasriworn, Luebeck,
& Korkmaz, 2011; Parsell, 2014) about the
importance of designing specifically for online.
This finding is consistent with students’ views on
the need, not only for learning design to engage,
but also for a stronger connection with others.
Many staff commented on the importance of
designing online content in ways that will more
easily connect students with each other and with
the teacher, encouraging greater interaction,
collaboration and communication. Comments
such as: “you can replicate peer support in an
online environment” (Teaching and Learning
Senior Manager); “discussion is the centrepiece of
the classroom experience” (Course Coordinator);
“allowing opportunities for students to engage
with the content online … teacher-presence …
responding to questions and comments”
(Curriculum Manager); show the possibilities
that are available when courses are appropriately
designed for online. Again, this is consistent with
other evidence (Canty, Goldberg, Ziebell, &
Ceperkovic, 2015; Parsell, 2014) indicating that
content can be designed in ways that provide
“opportunities for students to interact in multiple
ways with their peers in an online environment”
(Shackelford & Maxwell, 2012, p. 7).
Issues of accessibility and inclusivity were raised:
“If the unit is designed with universal access in
mind … a huge bulk of your challenges are
addressed” (Disability Advisor); also the
importance of having “Indigenous content in our
courses”, with examples of Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander students asking for “spaces in the
Stone
Student Success, 10(2) August 2019 | 7
curriculum where we can be heard and where we
can hear other voices” (Team Leader). Other
researchers have also been calling for greater
inclusivity in learning design to “promote the
success, retention and completion of Indigenous
people in higher education courses” (Reedy,
2011, p. 2). The strengths that these mature-age,
experienced students bring with them to the
virtual classroom can be highlighted and
enhanced through, for example, learning design
that “links university to the workplace more
effectively” (Downing, 2015, p. vi).
5. Contact and connect along the
student journey
This finding ties in closely with students’
comments about inclusion, communication,
connection with others and proactive
institutional support. Staff commented on the
need for regular and targeted institutional
communication, to enhance students’ sense of
belonging and engagement, as well as targeting
appropriate support as needed. Some institutions
had established systems of interventions by
which they could “reach out to students when we
think they may be sort of falling by the wayside,
having some difficulties” (Student Services
Manager). Many had implemented other types of
communication, such as “a welcome call which is
done by students, so it’s a student-to-student
communication” (Student Engagement Manager);
there were other examples of various contact
strategies from teaching areas, student support
and library services. The need for a proactive
approach was recognised. “Don’t wait for them to
approach you … just say ‘How’s it going? Is there
a problem?’” (Lecturer).
The possibility of multiple communication points
between the institution and student highlights
the need for a united approach. One institution
had “a communication strategy that’s at four
touch points along the first semester … also to link
off to other support systems” (Senior Manager).
Expectations on staff need to be realistic, as
expressed by one senior manager who explained
that “it’s very difficult for academic staff to deal
with the sheer volume”. Others were in the
process of developing institutional frameworks
for student interventions, such as that operating
at OU (Slade & Prinsloo, 2015), in which
communication between institution and student
is planned and implemented strategically rather
than in an ad-hoc way. Participants involved in
this framework talked about “building in person-
to-person support, right at the beginning” and
enabling them to “selectively message students or
make other interventions, like telephone”.
Anecdotal evidence from participants for the
positive impact on student outcomes from such
interventions - “I’ve been able to get my non-
completer rate down to four per cent … and my
fail rate down to one per cent” (Course
Coordinator) – is supported by evidence-based
research within both Australia and the UK
(Nelson & Creagh, 2012; Slade & Prinsloo, 2015;
Stone & O’Shea, 2013; Woodthorpe, 2015).
6. The role of learning analytics
Making strategic use of data on student activity
and behaviour within the learning management
system (LMS) can inform ways and times to reach
out to students with targeted support (Johnson et
al., 2016; Sclater, Peasgood, & Mullan, 2016). As
a recent report from the Australian Government
DET (2018) has found, “there is widespread
acceptance that learning analytics, if
implemented effectively, is a valuable tool for
addressing student retention” (p.24). Some
institutions had developed intervention
strategies informed by learning analytics,
however most were still very rudimentary, often
relying on individual staff members to extract
data manually from the LMS and contact students
on a piecemeal basis. “At the moment we have a
very manual process and what we are hoping for
is something much more automated” (Senior
Academic). Similar to other research findings
(West et al., 2016), many staff members were
interested in knowing more about how to use
student data to inform effective interventions and
outcomes but were not sure how to go about it or
from whom to seek assistance. As an Evaluation
Online learning in Australian higher education: Opportunities, challenges and transformations
8 | Student Success, 10(2) August 2019
Officer at one institution reported, “there’s so
much data there, we’re not collecting it in an
accessible form for lecturers to take appropriate
actions”.
However, there appeared to be a growing interest
across institutions in using student data, not only
to target students whose behaviour indicates a
need for immediate support, but also to make
predictions about who may need support in the
future, through the development of predictive
models. “We hope that predictive indicators get
us into, ‘actually, we think this student isn’t going
to submit their next assignment’, based on their
behavioural patterns” (Head of Analytics). Such
strategies can help to address the need expressed
by students for greater inclusiveness and
proactive support.
7. Collaboration to deliver support at
point of need
None of the above can be effectively delivered
without a high level of collaboration across the
various divisions, departments, faculties and
schools within institutions. The interviews with
staff revealed the importance of “joined-up
academic and non-academic support for students
in a holistic way” (Senior Executive). Such an
approach can make it possible, for example, to
embed timely support within the curriculum: “if
their referencing is not great … okay, we’ll get one
of my team in … we’ll create some sort of online
resource to embed” (Library Manager).
Collaboration across teaching and professional
areas enables academic literacies to be
“integrated within the classroom task … making
what’s implicit explicit” (Learning Support
Manager). As within the Open University UK,
where curriculum-based support teams have
been established (Slade & Prinsloo, 2015), with
support staff working within “dedicated
curriculum areas so they have much closer links
with teaching staff” (Lecturer), some Australian
institutions within this study were, to varying
degrees, aiming to build a more collaborative
approach to supporting students. Examples
included having “at least one student advisor in
every School” (Student Advisor Coordinator); and
“we’ve just distributed learning support across
the Faculty” (Senior Executive member). Those
who had experienced such collaborative
approaches were very positive about their
impact, with comments such as: “colleagues
within departments and faculties are quite happy
that the support is more accessible, they feel like
it’s closer (Senior Executive member)”; and “the
team approach was far better” (Program
Coordinator).
However, for online students, there was generally
quite poor access to the types of personal support
services that are readily available to on-campus
students, such as personal counselling, mental
health services and career services, which were
still largely operating in normal business hours.
“There’s not a lot of support out of hours for
online students … most things are nine to five
still” (Enabling Programs Manager). As one
learning designer commented, “it’s been focused
on the face-to-face students and there hasn’t
really been anything put in place for the online
students”, while an Equity Officer remarked, “we
need to be making sure that we have a kind of
online version of what we have on campus”.
Discussion and conclusions
In comparing findings from research into
students’ experiences of online learning with the
perspectives of staff involved in online education,
many commonalities and similarities have
emerged. It is a reassuring discovery that
university staff, working directly or indirectly
with online students, share many of the same
perspectives as their students about what is most
important for online student success. Specifically,
there are very similar views on what needs to be
done to engage online students, to help build their
sense of belonging within their studies, and to
help them succeed academically. These findings
demonstrate that, with online learning continuing
to grow rapidly, institutions need to move beyond
the conventional methods of external education
that have been relied upon in the past. Instead of
essentially trying to replicate the face-to-face
Stone
Student Success, 10(2) August 2019 | 9
learning experience at a distance, universities and
the staff within them need to embrace the digital
communication advances of the 21st century, to
deliver online education differently, in more
creative ways.
Today’s students, across all age-groups, are
familiar with the engaging digital platforms of
social media and the commercial world. They are
quick to recognise poor digital design and equally
quick to become disengaged by a poor online
experience. Online students tend to be, on the one
hand, more experienced than the face-to-face
cohort, by virtue of being older, employed and
competently managing other responsibilities; yet,
on the other hand, they tend to be academically
less experienced and hence less confident about
university than their face-to-face, younger
counterparts. With many of them coming back to
study after lengthy gaps, a good proportion from
under-represented equity groups and perhaps
also from backgrounds where neither family nor
friends have been to university, the challenges
can be immense. They want to feel that they
belong and that they are valued. They express a
desire for strong connections with teachers, with
other students and the institutions in which they
are studying.
The findings outlined in this paper – taken from
the perspectives and experiences of both online
students and the staff who work with them – can
point the way towards transforming online
learning from what is, in many cases, simply a
digital delivery of face-to-face content with high
attrition rates, to one that encourages greater
retention and success through embracing the
potential of both technology and people. External
students, whose primary, or in many cases, only
mode of learning is online, are largely ‘unseen’. To
improve these students’ opportunities for
ongoing participation and success, institutions
need to ensure they are kept ‘visible’ through a
range of measures across the whole institution.
They need to be considered every bit as
important as those who literally can be ‘seen’.
While individual staff members undoubtedly
make a positive difference to the success of many,
through the measures they implement within
their own areas of work, a whole-of-institution
approach is required to make a difference on a
larger scale - to raise online education from the
status of an ‘add-on’, to one that is truly ‘core-
business’.
References
Canty, A. J., Goldberg, L. R., Ziebell, J. M., & Ceperkovic, H.
(2015, November). Meeting the Challenge of designing
and delivering an entry level unit of study to engage and
inspire learners in online neuroscience education in a
Bachelor of Dementia Care. Paper presented at the ICERI
Proceedings, Seville, Spain.
Cardak, B., Brett, M., Bowden, M., Vecci, J., Barry, P.,
Bahtsevanoglou, J., & McAllister, R. (2017). Regional
Student Participation and Migration: Analysis of factors
influencing regional student participation and internal
migration in Australian higher education. Retrieved
from https://www.ncsehe.edu.au/wp-
content/uploads/2017/02/Regional-Student-
Participation-and-Migration-20170227-Final.pdf
Delahunty, J., Verenikina, I., & Jones, P. (2014). Socio-
emotional connections: Identity, belonging and learning
in online interactions. A literature review. Technology,
Pedagogy and Education, 23(2), 243-265.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2013.813405
Department of Education and Training (2017a). 2016
Appendix 2 Equity Groups. Retrieved from
Department of Education and Training website
https://docs.education.gov.au/documents/2016-
appendix-2-equity-groups
Department of Education and Training (2017b). Completion
Rates of Higher Education Students- Cohort Analysis,
2005-2014. Retrieved from Department of Education
and Training website
https://docs.education.gov.au/documents/completion
-rates-higher-education-students-cohort-analysis-
2005-2014.
Department of Education and Training (2017c). Improving
Retention, Completion and Success in Higher Education.
Canberra: Australian Government. Retrieved from
Department of Education and Training website
https://docs.education.gov.au/node/44121
Department of Education and Training (2018). Higher
Education Standards Panel Final Report - Improving
Retention, Completion and Success in Higher Education.
Retrieved from Department of Education and Training
website
https://docs.education.gov.au/documents/higher-
education-standards-panel-final-report-improving-
retention-completion-and-success
Online learning in Australian higher education: Opportunities, challenges and transformations
10 | Student Success, 10(2) August 2019
Devlin, M. (2013). eLearning Vision. Federation University.
Retrieved from
http://federation.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/
159122/FedUni_eVision2014.pdf
Downing, J. (2015). Applied Learning Design in an Online
Teacher-Education Course. (doctoral dissertation),
Murdoch University, Perth, Australia Retrieved from
http://researchrepository.murdoch.edu.au/id/eprint/
30925/
Johnson, L., Adams Becker, S., Cummins, M., Estrada, V.,
Freeman, A., & Hall, C. (2016). NMC Horizon Report:
2016 Higher Education Edition. Retrieved from
http://cdn.nmc.org/media/2016-nmc-horizon-report-
he-EN.pdf
Kent, M. (2015). Access and Barriers to Online Education for
People with Disabilities. Retrieved from the National
Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education website
https://www.ncsehe.edu.au/wp-
content/uploads/2016/05/Access-and-Barriers-to-
Online-Education-for-People-with-Disabilities.pdf
Kuiper, A. (2015). Making the implicit explicit: An investigation
into teacher presence in face-to-face and online courses.
Paper presented at the International Society for the
Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, Melbourne.
Lambrinidis, G. (2014). Supporting online, non-traditional
students through the introduction of effective e-
learning tools in a pre-university tertiary enabling
programme. Journal of Higher Education Policy and
Management, 36(3), 257-267.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2014.899053
Mayes, R., Ku, H, Akarasriworn, C., Luebeck, L., & Korkmaz, O
(2011). Themes and strategies for transformative
online instruction: a review of literature and practice.
Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 12(3).
Retrieved from
https://www.infoagepub.com/quarterly-review-of-
distance-education.html
Moore, C., & Greenland, S. J. (2017). Employment-driven
online student attrition and the assessment policy
divide: An Australian open-access higher education
perspective. Journal of Open, Flexible and Distance
Learning, 21(1), 52-62.
Nelson, K., & Creagh, T. (2012). Case Study 7: University of
New England (UNE) Early Alert Program. In Good
practice for safeguarding student learning engagement
in higher education institutions (pp. 85-90). Brisbane,
Australia: Queensland University of Technology.
O'Shea, S., Stone, C., & Delahunty, J. (2015). "I 'feel' like I am at
university even though I am online." Exploring how
students narrate their engagement with higher
education institutions in an online learning
environment. Distance Education, 36(1), 41-58.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2015.1019970
Parsell, M. (2014). Standards for Online Education, Final
Report. Retrieved from
https://www.onlinestandards.net
Pollard, L. (2018). Remote student university success: An
analysis of policy and practice. NCSEHE 2017 Equity
Fellowship Final Report. Retrieved from the National
Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education website
https://www.ncsehe.edu.au/publications/remote-
student-university-success-analysis-policy-practice/
Ragusa, A. T., & Crampton, A. (2018). Sense of connection,
identity and academic success in distance education:
Sociologically exploring online learning environments.
Rural Society, 27(2), 125-142.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10371656.2018.1472914
Reedy, A. (2011, December). Equity in a digital world:
Engaging Indigenous learners. Paper presented at the
ASCILITE Conference, Hobart, Tasmania.
Sclater, N., Peasgood, A., & Mullan, J. (2016). Learning Analytics
in Higher Education: A Review of UK and International
Practice: Full Report. Retrieved from
https://www.jisc.ac.uk/sites/default/files/learning-
analytics-in-he-v3.pdf
Shackelford, J. L., & Maxwell, M. (2012). Sense of community
in graduate online education: Contribution of learner to
learner interaction. The International Review of
Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 13(4), 228-
249.
Signor, L., & Moore, C. (2014). Open Access in Higher
Education–Strategies for Engaging Diverse Student
Cohorts. Open Praxis, 6(3), 305-313.
http://dx.doi.org/10.5944/openpraxis.6.3.132
Slade, S., & Prinsloo, P. (2015). Stemming the flow: Improving
retention for distance learning students. Paper
presented at the EDEN 2015 Annual Conference
Proceedings, European Distance and E-Learning
Network.
Stone, C. (2017). Opportunity through online learning:
Improving student access, participation and success in
higher education. NCSEHE 2016 Equity Fellowship Final
Report. Retrieved from the National Centre for Student
Equity in Higher Education website
https://www.ncsehe.edu.au/publications/opportunity
-online-learning-improving-student-access-
participation-success-higher-education/
Stone, C., & O'Shea, S. (2013). Time, money, leisure and guilt –
the gendered challenges of higher education for
mature-age students. Australian Journal of Adult
Learning, 53(1), 95-116. Retrieved from
https://www.ajal.net.au/
Stone, C. & O’Shea, S. (2019). Older, online and first:
Recommendations for retention and success.
Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 35(1),
57-69. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.3913
Stone, C., O'Shea, S., May, J., Delahunty, J., & Partington, Z.
(2016). Opportunity through online learning:
experiences of first-in-family students in online open-
entry higher education. Australian Journal of Adult
Learning, 56(2), 146-169. Retrieved from
https://www.ajal.net.au/
Stone
Student Success, 10(2) August 2019 | 11
West, D., Huijser, H., Jiaotong, X., Heath, D., Lizzio, A., Toohey,
D., & Bronnimann, J. (2016). Higher education teachers’
experiences with learning analytics in relation to
student retention. Australasian Journal of Educational
Technology, 32(5), 48-60.
https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.3435
Woodthorpe, J. (2015). Improving student attainment and
completion through mid-module tutor conversations.
Milton Keynes: SST Enhancement Digest.
Feature article—author
biography
Cathy Stone is an independent consultant and
researcher in the field of higher education student
equity, retention and success. She is a Conjoint
Associate Professor in Social Work at the University
of Newcastle, Australia and an Adjunct Fellow with
the National Centre for Student Equity in Higher
Education at Curtin University. Cathy has spent
much of her career developing and managing
student support and success strategies for both on-
campus and online students. Her research and
publications focus particularly on the experiences
of mature-age, first-in-family and online students.
