Derek Roggenbuck Nancy Elliott English 111 December 3, 2013 Looking Back on Online Learning My English 111 teacher

assigned us a multi-source synthesis paper as our final assignment. She explained that the topic had to be complicated and not easily reachable. I wrote my paper on the effectiveness of online learning compared to traditional in class methods. I chose this topic because I knew it would be challenging to differentiate between the two methods. Some people would have my perspective: online classes are less effective; others would have the mindset that virtual courses are the most innovative and helpful tools in learning. Another reason is because I had recently taken an online class, so I knew I could talk about that. I wanted to study different peoples experiences with taking courses online; also, I wanted to share my perspective on the subject. I searched the internet for many different perspectives, studies, and statistics. All the stories, studies, and statistics were intriguing; however, none of the statistics I found showed a substantial favor in one direction in my argument. This is what made my paper a difficult topic to debate. Even though most people had a set position to the topic, the studies they conducted show results of success and failure in online academics. I had to make sure that when writing this paper I used only scholarly sources, like past teachers, professors, or people with a degree that are qualifies in the field. The sources I chose had all multiple perspectives on the subject, some had positive aspects to talk about, but most had negative experiences with online classes. Most of the negative result stemmed from cheating, test scores, or just overall frustration to the student and instructor. I

experienced a lot of frustration with my online classes, so I wrote my synthesis partly to see if I was the only person who felt like this. To find out the answers to my questions, and to hopefully educate more people, I wrote my paper in different sections. First, I shared my own personal experience with online classes and the outcomes that came from them. Generally, I hadn't had good luck mostly because I am the kind of person who requires face-to-face interaction. Face-to-face interaction is something I mention multiple times in my paper, as so did my sources. This topic is an important part of my paper because it is the main difference between online and classroom classes. I mostly wanted to inform people about online learning along with the pros and cons it offers. My second antention I had when I wrote this paper was to provoke discussion between readers and what they thought was the most effective method. I offered my opinion along with the information to give contrast with the information, also to show that there are two sides to every topic. I didn't feel like I needed to persuade my readers to think one way or the other because I believe this tool can be more helpful to different people. I did, however leave out some sources that I had found because they seemed quite bias on either ends of the argument. Some people were against simply because they got a bad grade or because of their instructor, not because of the format. Other people were in favor simply because they had previously taught or played a part in an online class setting that went well. I feel like leaving out these sources helped me get the most accurate and fair argument across, instead of just what I thought was the right side. Mostly I tried to keep my synthesis paper on the topic of formats of either methods and how they affected the students. For example, when I introduced my source that talked about online plagiarism and cheating, I focused on why the setting of the class made it easier or harder to cheat. All of these techniques helped me get my information across to my audience.

Hopefully, I reached out to the audience of students that were thinking about taking a class like this and that the paper would help them make their decisions. When searching for my scholarly sources, I wanted to narrow the list down to people who had sufficient qualifications. Credible sources were vital when writing my synthesis paper. For example, if I were to use the opinions of any student that took an online class, it wouldn't seem very believable. When I used professors and people with degrees to quote in my paper, it made a very trustworthy paper. Searching for scholarly sources wasn't always easy though, most articles or papers didn't have the accreditation of the author clearly displayed, therefore I didn't use them. Once I attained my sources, I needed to find a way to effectively exhibit their ideas a points of view. One way I did this was by mixing the sources with positive and negative views in alternating paragraphs. This method gave my synthesis paper variety. I also tried to link their ideas off of each other, like what one source would say to the other, which wasn't always easy because of their opposing views. Even though it was difficult to assemble these ideas as one, in the end it came together. After writing my synthesis essay, I had my paper sent in to be reviewed by college officials. All and all, their feedback on my paper was positive and helpful. Mostly they had good things to say about my topics and debates; however, there were some attributes that needed my attention. For example, the person correcting my paper felt that they weren't sure if all my sources were academic. Even though I know that all my sources are academically accurate, I must not have made myself perfectly clear. On the other hand, my evaluator didn't state his academic stature in my rubric, so really I can't be certain that they are an official, accredited, and academic source. Another critique that my evaluator administered to my paper was that I needed more cohesion in bringing my paragraphs together. I agree that bringing all

these different sources together helps the flow of a paper; however, cohesion is a challenge to accomplish in a paper like this because all sources have different topics and views on the subject. After further review though, I found similarities and opposites that would help me transition my paragraphs from one source to the next. Once this was done, the flow of my paper had a noticeable increase. The next critique was about my definition of the goal of learning. Although our two definitions are very similar, theyre definition of gaining new knowledge is probably the more accurate definition. All of the comments made helped me improve my paper, and further review helped me fine tune more of my stances on topics discussed. After reflecting on my paper, and reading the testimonies of all the other perspectives of all the other sources, I learned a lot. The research also made me think more about my views on online learning. Even though I still believe traditional classrooms with physical teachers, books, and communication are the superior form of education, I can now understand more of why people would take online classes. I also hope my readers have taken a side after reading my paper, and if not take a side, gained some knowledge on the subject. Because shedding knowledge on this subject was my main goal when writing this paper.