Running Head: FACE-TO-FACE VS.

ONLINE PD IN RURAL SCHOOLS

A Comparison of Professional Development in Small and Rural Schools:

Face to Face vs. Online Instruction
Vince Moore
University of North Texas
CECS 6512
Dr. Lin Lin

FACE-TO-FACE VS. ONLINE PD IN RURAL SCHOOLS

Abstract
This mixed method study utilizes a convergent parallel design to explore the perceptions of
teachers toward online professional development in the rural K-12 setting. It has been said that
online training, if designed appropriately and managed effectively, offers much promise in
enhancing many facets of teacher competencies (Orleans, 2010). The results of our study
indicated that teachers had positive perception of online professional development approach and
its practicality for adding values to their own teaching skills. However, there are serious
considerations for the future of online professional development that emerged from the results.
The respondents of this study refer to several benefits and concerns with online professional
development that will help future instructional designers improve the effectiveness of teacher
training.

FACE-TO-FACE VS. ONLINE PD IN RURAL SCHOOLS

A Comparison of Professional Development in Small and Rural Schools:

Face to Face vs. Online Instruction
For the past few decades, the internet has been increasingly important to the education
world. Students use the internet for research on a variety of assignments, teachers find resources
for to make their courses more impactful for learners, and pre-service teachers take classes that
incorporate online learning to help them gain the tools they need to succeed in the classroom.
One area that has also seen a change as a result of the growth of the internet is the realm of
professional development. For years, teachers took professional development in person, sitting
in rows or at tables as experts shared their views about whatever topic were being covered in that
training. Now, thanks to technological advances, there are a variety of types of professional
development that can be completed partially or completely online. There are discussion boards,
webinars, videoconferences, quiz modules, and other formats available for teachers to continue
their learning and bring new strategies into their own classrooms. Perhaps nowhere has this push
for online professional development been seen more than in rural areas, where traditional
training meant hours on the road or sums of money for experts to train teachers in-house.
But, what are the feelings toward these online professional developments? Do teachers
prefer online workshops over face-to-face training? What advantages and disadvantages do
teachers see with doing their continued training online? It is hypothesized that teachers in a rural
setting would prefer to receive their training via the internet as opposed to going to face-to-face
training located in the nearest city. To gauge the feelings of rural teachers, this mixed-methods
study used a survey and a set of interviews in a convergent parallel design to gather information
about K-12 teachers perceptions regarding online professional development. It is hoped that
this research will help researchers, practitioners of professional development, and school

FACE-TO-FACE VS. ONLINE PD IN RURAL SCHOOLS

leadership to make choices to provide the most effective forms of professional development to
teachers in the future.
Literature Review
The education field requires that teachers and staff stay up-to-date on current practices
and theories in order to provide the most effective learning environment for their students. One
of the ways that this continued learning takes place is through professional development.
Oftentimes, this means that the teacher must drive to a regional facility and sit through a class or
presentation about a topic of interest or importance. Sometimes, the school district may bring in
an expert to present materials to the staff in their own facilities (Guskey, 2000). However, it is
not essential that this training take place face to face. With the increase of technological
abilities, such as high-speed internet, cheap video conferencing, and easy multimedia creation, it
is becoming more and more widespread to do at least part of the required professional
development via the online learning environment (Bruder, 2013; Desimone, Porter, Garet, Yoon,
& Birman, 2002; Roskos, Jarosewich, Lenhart, & Collins, 2007; US Department of Education,
2010.) For many teachers from small and/or rural schools, the growth of available online
training could be an important factor in professional development. By being located far from
regional education service centers, it is a greater burden for rural teachers to attend professional
development workshops. Small schools could lack the funds to hire experts to come on site to
provide professional development. These situations, however, are eliminated--or at the very
least, reduced--by the inclusion of online training in the continuing education of teachers and
staff.
One question that remains, however, surrounds the feelings of teachers towards online
professional development as it compares to face-to-face training (Dash, de Kramer, ODwyer,

FACE-TO-FACE VS. ONLINE PD IN RURAL SCHOOLS

Masters, & Russell, 2012; Dede, Ketelhut, Whitehouse, Breit, & McCloskey, 2009). To examine
the relationship between professional development and the medium in which it occurs, one
should look at both sides of the issue before endeavoring to see how others feel about the issue.
In the spirit of that thought, this paper explores the benefits and downfalls of both face-to-face
and online professional development. Then, the comparison between the two is researched by
attempting to ascertain the viewpoints of practicing K-12 teachers from predominantly rural and
small school settings.
Benefits and Problems with Face-to-Face Professional Development
Historically, receiving professional development entailed going to a large lecture hall or
meeting room with dozens of other educators from the surrounding school districts to sit and
listen to a speaker extol on the topic du jour while taking notes or looking over a handout
(Borko, 2004). Hopefully, some of the information could be brought back to the attendees
schools and classrooms to make a positive impact on their teaching or the learning of the
students. Sometimes hands-on workshops would provide teachers the opportunity to manipulate
whatever manipulatives were being used in the workshop or the lesson. Many researchers have
found these one-time only workshops and conferences to be of little real value to the effective
use in the classroom (Barab, MaKinster, Moore, & Cunningham, 2001; Garet, Porter, Desimone,
Birmer, & Yoon, 2001; Reitzug, 2002). Unfortunately, many teachers live and work many miles
from an urban center large enough to house an educational facility that provides these learning
opportunities to teachers. To obtain the training that is being offered, then, it is up to the teacher
to travel a great distance to sit in said classroom and use said manipulatives. Occasionally,
school districts will bring a speaker or presenter into its schools to do training; often this training
has been specifically prepared for the district in question. However, these speakers can charge a

FACE-TO-FACE VS. ONLINE PD IN RURAL SCHOOLS

large amount to bring their words and message to the masses, and many small schools could be
unable to afford the fees.
In most learning situations, however, face-to-face instruction provides many benefits. It
is almost impossible to overstate the importance of being able to communicate immediately with
the presenter about specific concepts, processes, or products that come from professional
development workshops (Garet et al., 2001). Sitting in a room with teachers from a variety of
schools is also a large benefit for teachers attending face-to-face workshops. Having
conversations about daily life, lesson plans, facilities, administrators, students, and other issues
with teachers from other locales is another positive benefit of having face-to-face training.
Hearing about the trials and tribulations of other teachers can help put problems in perspective,
inspire new solutions, and give a greater understanding to the universal issues inherent to
education. These networks can become very valuable tools in the arsenal of any teacher,
regardless of size or setting of their home school.
Benefits and Problems with Online Professional Development
In the technologically-driven world of today, it is becoming more and more
commonplace for teachers to take their professional development online. These online trainings
can manifest in a variety of ways, including pre-made videos with quizzes, interactive video
conferencing, discussion boards on a learning management system, etc. (Bruder, 2013; Carter,
2004; Dede et al., 2004; Dinaro, 2011; Hutchison & Colwell, 2011). No matter the specifics of
the structure, online professional development can be a great benefit for teachers everywhere, but
more especially those in small or far-flung school districts. The teachers that come from the
remote areas with low populations can be given an opportunity to obtain training without the
burdens of face-to-face workshops (Orleans, 2010). Teachers no longer need to travel great

FACE-TO-FACE VS. ONLINE PD IN RURAL SCHOOLS

distances to take a training course. Cash-strapped districts can potentially provide training with
experts while avoiding travel and housing fees. Perhaps most importantly, these online trainings
are often available at any time, which gives the educators flexibility to take the training on their
own schedules (Brown & Green, 2003; Bruder, 2013; Carter, 2004; Dede et al., 2004; Howard &
McGrath, 1995).
However, behind these benefits one will find some problems in the realm of online
professional development. Many online training opportunities get their flexibility by being prefabricated, which eliminates the ability of the learner to have a discussion with the presenter.
The lack of collaboration and communication is one of the biggest issues that educators have
with online training. Another problem that many teachers might encounter with online
professional development concerns the inability to transfer learning to the real-world classrooms
in which they work on a daily basis (Brown & Green, 2003; Dash et al., 2012; Dillon, Dworkin,
Gengler, & Olson, 2000; Fishman, Konstantopoulos, Kubitsky, Vath, Park, Johnson, & Edelson,
2013; Lock, 2006).
Method
This research adopted a mixed methods approach, utilizing convergent parallel design to
understand whether online training presents a perceived value to enhance teaching skills for
educators. This design is the most popular mixed methods design and is sometimes simply
called the convergent design or a triangulation design, and occurs when quantitative and
qualitative components of a design are implemented concurrently (Maruyama & Ryan, 2014).
Merging qualitative and quantitative data provides different by complementary data when
collected and analyzed concurrently (Luyt, 2012). The two strands, quantitative and qualitative,
are of equal significance, even though the data are usually collected and analyzed independently

FACE-TO-FACE VS. ONLINE PD IN RURAL SCHOOLS

before being joined for interpretation (Maruyama & Ryan, 2014). A part of the convergent
parallel method is the convergent interview, which was originally created by Bob Dick of the
University of Australia. His aim was to collect, analyze, and interpret peoples experiences,
opinions, attitudes, beliefs and knowledge that converge around a set of interviews (Driedger,
2008, p. 125). The convergent interview is an interview which is intended to explore issues
widely through unstructured interviews with a maximum sample (Dick, 2002). In the framework
of this study, merging the qualitative and quantitative data proved to be the most beneficial.
Using the convergent parallel method allowed us to complete a quantitative analysis on
the surveys and a qualitative examination of the interviews before merging the analysis together
for the results. The central idea behind using convergent parallel design is the complementary
data will balance each other and provide a richer source of information than either type would on
its own (Maruyama & Ryan, 2014). Creswell (2007) describes qualitative research as the study
of research problems inquiring into the meaning individuals or groups ascribe to a social or
human problem (p. 37). For this study, we also used multiple data sources such as surveys and
interviews with the participants.
Participants
The participants in this study included K-12 teachers and administrators from two rural
school districts in Texas; the participants ranged from part-time to full-time employment. The
survey was sent to all professional staff, which includes teachers, librarians, counselors, and
administrators, in the two independent school districts. The professional staff of the two districts
combined totals 160 personnel, of which 109 participated, giving us a participation rate of 68%
(Texas Education Agency, 2014a; Texas Education Agency, 2014b). The participants answered
a series of questions about their perceptions of online training for professional development in

FACE-TO-FACE VS. ONLINE PD IN RURAL SCHOOLS

two phases, 100 answered quantitatively in a survey format and nine responded qualitatively in
an interview format.
The survey questionnaire consisted of 15 questions. Of the 100 participants which
answered the survey, 55% had over 10 years of teaching experience. It should be noted that this
survey did not probe deeply enough to determine if the years of experience had an impact on
their perception of online professional development. Nine participants participated in the
interview which consisted of 14 questions regarding experience and feelings about online
professional development.
Data Collection
The data collection process consisted of two parts: a) an internet-based survey consisting
of 15 questions, and b) a face-to-face interview of 14 standard questions with follow up
discussion. The survey was administered on the Internet via SurveyMonkey, and included
questions about teachers perceptions of online professional development. The survey was based
on one used as part of the Teachers Professional Development Needs Assessment (Texas Center
for the Advancement of Literacy and Learning, 2011). The professional staff of each district
received an informational email prior to the survey to recruit participation. An unsolicited email
from the superintendent of one district was also sent out requesting participation in the survey.
Later in that same week, the first email was sent to all professional staff in both districts with a
link to the survey. One week later, another email was sent out to remind staff about the survey
and provide the link again.
While the survey process was being undertaken, twelve individuals within the districts
were selected for a potential interview. These subjects were chosen because it was believed they
would have insight into the topic that would be beneficial for the study at hand. Of those 12,

FACE-TO-FACE VS. ONLINE PD IN RURAL SCHOOLS

10

nine elected to participate in the interview process. The interview questions asked participants to
discuss their usage of internet tools, their experiences with online training, and their perceptions
of online training for professional development. Appropriate steps were taken to protect the
identity of participants in accordance with the National Institute of Health and the University of
North Texas Institutional Review Board (IRB) for the protection of human research subjects.
Results
In our convergent parallel design, we gathered results from the 100 surveys administered
and the nine interviews performed. By analyzing each of these data sources independently and
then combining their results at the end, the data paints a clearer picture of the issues surrounding
the topic of online professional development. Also, by maintaining separation in the data
collection and analysis process, the results do not influence one another. That allows the
researchers to gather information from each that may not be attainable from either source alone.
Interviews
The participants in the interviews were chosen to provide a range of years of experience
and teaching assignments. These participants also included a range of technological savviness
and history of professional development. The youngest teacher interviewed was 32 years old;
the oldest, 59 years old. The years of experience in education ranged from 8 to 28, with a mean
of 14.67, mode of 10, and median of 12. The teaching experiences of the interview participants
ranged from elementary (2), junior high/middle school (2), high school (3), and administration
(2).
Based on the interviews, three definite themes emerged. First, all respondents discussed
the importance of flexibility provided by online professional development opportunities; this
flexibility refers to both scheduling and location. They all also discussed issues with interaction

FACE-TO-FACE VS. ONLINE PD IN RURAL SCHOOLS

11

and collaboration in both positive and negative ways when comparing face to face and online
professional development. The third main theme that can be discerned from the interviews is the
structure or format of the online training itself. Some other items were mentioned by more than
one person in interviews, but these three topics dominated the conversations of almost every
interview.
The importance of flexibility.
Every person interviewed made mention of the benefit afforded by online professional
development in the area of flexibility. Flexibility includes the location of the professional
development, the scheduling of the training, and the ability to work at ones own pace. Some of
the keywords that were found among the responses were self-paced, at home, fits in your
schedule, on my own time, and of course, flexible. Related topics included the ability to
take training without having to drive a distance, thus saving time and money for gas.
The persons interviewed repeated over and over how the self-paced nature and ability to
complete training in a busy schedule was one of the greatest benefits to online professional
development. When asked about what interested one subject about online professional
development, she stated, The flexibility. Being able to do it on my own time and at my own
pace; I can do it at home and take breaks. I have a four year old, so when she needs me for
something, I can push pause and then come back at a better time. Another interviewee
mentioned the busy schedule of her daily job and the fact that online professional development
fits in whenever she can do it. Itd be cheaper---time-wise; I dont have the time to spend
driving...theres just too much to do in my day...so online would be better.
Family and driving time were both mentioned several times as a reason to want to do
trainings from home online. One response showed a preference for online training over driving

FACE-TO-FACE VS. ONLINE PD IN RURAL SCHOOLS

12

to a face-to-face workshop by stating that driving would take a lot of time away from my
boys...so online would be better. The issue of driving time brings up another important aspect
of online professional developments flexibility: location. The ability to do training anywhere
was important to respondents, as well. All of those interviewed work in rural school districts, so
most face-to-face trainings require travel to a more urban locale. One interviewee stated, Its
nice to not have to go somewhere---especially when you live in a place like [name of town] and
youre an hour away from anything. Its nice to not have to deal with driving all over to learn
some stuff. Avoiding travel is beneficial for the teacher and for the school district. As one
subject mentioned, [Online training] would save money for our district since were a small
town; instead of sending all of us to a training, just have us meet in a classroom and do it online.
One respondent also mentioned what could be the most important aspect of online professional
development when she quipped, Plus, you get to work on it in your pajamas, so theres that!
Issues with interaction.
In addition to flexibility, the other main topic of the interview responses dealt with
interaction during professional development. This issue made appearances in both positive and
negative connotations when looking at online professional development as it compares to faceto-face training. While online training allows teachers to collaborate with people outside of their
immediate geographical area, it can lead to frustration when our normal communication patterns
are hindered.
Online professional development has the ability to connect teachers to peers that live far
away from their home areas, which can be a great benefit. One person surveyed, who teaches as
a band director, mentioned the importance of online training opportunities in his position,
including how online tools have enhanced collaboration. Band directors have a Facebook group

FACE-TO-FACE VS. ONLINE PD IN RURAL SCHOOLS

13

that we use Yesterday in fact, somebody asked a question about clarinet embouchure and
articulation and tongue placement or something and a director from some school in East Texas
whos a great clarinet guy posted a video demonstrating how to fix the problem...Seeing it on
paper wouldnt have made sense, but seeing the actual video makes it click for me...That
wouldnt have ever happened without the chat board, so yeah, we're able to talk to people around
the state or country now.
While the ability to collaborate beyond geographical limits is a benefit, sometimes
online professional development can create difficult communication situations. Almost every
respondent decried the lack of face to face interaction inherent in many forms of online
training. Many teachers were worried about the inability to ask questions in the same way as
in-person training. Even when the online medium is synchronous and allows interaction, there
are problems that can arise. Because of the technology involved, there can be a delay when
speaking, which can lead to a chaotic environment. The other day I was on a conference call
where it was like two hours of struggling to communicate. Any time there was a silence,
everyone tried to talk and then you get everyone trying to be polite and say, You go ahead,
No, you go ahead, No, you first, and thats all delayed, too, so it was a mess. A lot of time,
thats how I feel online. Another person brought up the same scenario by saying, Theres
always lag and people end up stepping on each others words, so it gets really annoying.
Concerns about format.
Almost every teacher interviewed also had things to say about the structure or format of
the online training being received. When the respondents were asked about the types of online
professional development they had experienced, there were some discrepancies about what to
call certain types of structure (e.g., videochat, distance learning, webinar, etc.) The continuum of

FACE-TO-FACE VS. ONLINE PD IN RURAL SCHOOLS

14

online training formats moves from one-sided and asynchronous to interactive and synchronous.
Some of those surveyed had a variety of experiences, but all subjects were familiar with the onesided, asynchronous training of watching a video or reading a passage and then answering
questions over the content presented.
These types of training were often viewed negatively: Id like to see something with
more interaction---not just the predesigned Heres a slide. Read it. Answer the questions. kind
of training like the ones we have to take a lot of the time. Another interviewee also said,
Sometimes the online stuff can be very boring. It can be very one-sided and you dont get to
participate. On the other hand, these one-sided, asynchronous modules were seen as beneficial
in that they are often able to be completed quickly and easily. You know, sometimes
interactions are great, but other times I just need to know the facts and let me move on!
Another opined, If its a boring compliance topic, and youre not going to get excited about it--sometimes you just have to get it done, ya know?
Some of the interview questions dealt with the ability of online training to impact
teaching and learning in the face-to-face K-12 classroom, and some of those asked said that it
depended on the format of the training. The respondents stated that they felt if the material being
covered in the training was demonstrated appropriately and the workshop was engaging, then the
likelihood of successful practical implementation increased. However, it was noted that this was
true of both face-to-face training and online professional development.
Survey
Teacher types represented.
In the survey portion of the study, there was a satisfactory mix of High School (36%),
Middle School (25%), and Elementary School (53%) teachers. Since this study was to be

FACE-TO-FACE VS. ONLINE PD IN RURAL SCHOOLS

15

representative of a K-12 environment, it was considered paramount in achieving a good ratio

between these three school types. However, we found most of the respondents were Full-time
Instructors (FTIs). Other groups were involved as well, however not nearly to the same degree
as the FTIs. These groups included Part-time Instructors, Instructional Aides, and several in the
Other category. Figure A1 shows the extent to which FTIs dominated the survey, comprising
76% of all respondents. Because of this, the results of the survey give a good view into the
perceptions of K-12, Full-time instructors, however all other classes of educators do not pose a
statistically significant portion of the survey to firmly conclude anything on their behalf.
Differences in experience.
The survey also inquired as to how long teachers had been part of the educational
landscape, and found a good mix between those who had been teaching for more than 10 years,
and those who had been teaching for less than 10 years. Figure A2 shows this mix, and also
displays how the survey broke down the less than 10 years segment into the subgroups of 5-10
years, 3-4 years, 1-2 years, and less than 1 year. As with the instructor type portion, these
subgroups were too small by themselves to have significance, however when grouped together
they give a good representation of the dichotomy between those who have taught for more than
10 years and those who have not.
One interesting finding was how each group valued the three types of learning mentioned
in the survey: Online, Face-to-Face, and Hybrid. As displayed in Figure A3, when looked at as
a whole, Face-to-Face was overwhelmingly preferred to Online or Hybrid Classrooms.
However, when examining the respondents who had less than 10 years experience, a shift was
present towards Hybrid learning, almost surpassing Face-to-Face as the preferred medium of
instruction with an average of a 1.91 ranking, while Face-to-Face was 1.70. Conversely,

FACE-TO-FACE VS. ONLINE PD IN RURAL SCHOOLS

16

instructors with more than 10 years experience seemed to go the opposite direction, preferring
Face-to-Face with a much higher frequency: 1.44 for Face-to-Face, with Hybrid at 2.48 for the
group.
While the survey was conducted in rural Texas, the results still showed a high frequency
of high-speed internet connection and both home and the workplace. It is most likely due to this
access to high-speed internet that most respondents were at least open to the idea of taking an
online professional development course. Out of the 100 surveyed, 53 responded maybe and
another 42 responded absolutely yes to the question: If a particular professional development
workshop were offered online but not face-to-face, would you still participate in the workshop?
While this is encouraging, it should also be noted that 93 respondents stated they are required to
take professional development courses by their employers.
Topics of interest.
Based on the survey, most teachers are at least aware of the educational programs and
tools available to them on the internet. However, as Figures A4 and A5 show, there is a much
wider acceptance of technology tools in the classroom in contrast to use of social tools. With
technology tools such as YouTube, Microsoft Excel, and Interactive Smartboards, full-time
teachers are both aware of and utilize these programs in their classrooms. However, with social
media the awareness far outpaces the classroom use.
The last question of the survey dealt with what types of activities the teachers would like
to learn during online professional development sessions. The 4 highest scoring activities were:
1. Interactive Smartboards, 2. Thinkfinity Activities, 3. Google Sites, and 4. Learning
Management Systems. The bottom of the scale was overwhelmingly Interactive CDs, with

FACE-TO-FACE VS. ONLINE PD IN RURAL SCHOOLS

17

Social Networks also trending poorly as a topic of interest. Figure A6 shows all entries for
topics of interest.
Discussion
Based on the data that we acquired, it is safe to say that the hypothesis of teachers
preferring online training over face to face professional development needs more research. Yes,
there are some aspects of online professional development that are positively regarded by the
majority of teachers surveyed or interviewed, but these are tempered by certain disadvantages
that come with the nature of online training. Within the data are also some interesting findings
that neither support nor decry the use of online training.
Two Sides of the Same Coin
Among the positive attributes of online professional development, the teachers counted
flexibility of training near the top. Every person interviewed stated that the freedom to do the
training whenever and wherever they could was a benefit. However, the main negative aspect of
online professional development was listed as a lack of interaction or difficulty communicating.
These are two sides of the same coin, however, and they deal with the format of the online
professional development itself. The online trainings that offer the most freedom for the user are
the asynchronous, one-sided types. If the training is a pre-developed module with videos or
passages followed by questions to answer, it gives full authority to the end user to perform the
training at their leisure. There is no scheduled interaction; therefore, the training is completely
flexible. The trainings with the most collaboration between presenters and receivers (and among
those attending) are synchronous and interactive in nature. To achieve this community of
learning, the training must be scheduled at a certain time; to take advantage of the interaction, the

FACE-TO-FACE VS. ONLINE PD IN RURAL SCHOOLS

18

teachers must be in a place conducive to communication. Therefore, the biggest benefit and the
biggest downfall are actually at opposite ends of the spectrum of formats for online learning.
Another Dichotomy
Another interesting dichotomy that emerged concerned the preference of topic of training
when taking online professional development. In the survey, participants were asked, What
type of skill enhancements would interest you in an online professional development course?
The answer that received the most responses was Computer Skills at 48.96%. However, more
than one interview subject said anecdotally that they would prefer not learning about computers
over the computer. Perhaps this oxymoronic situation was a result of the nature of the research
method: maybe while performing an online survey, it was on the teachers minds that they
needed more computer skills, while participants were thinking of negative experiences with
online training when discussing the topic in the survey.
Limitations and Future Research
This research, like most research, does have its limitations. The survey was not set up in
a way to fully discern the demographic data about the respondents that could have more vividly
created themes in the data. The survey also included terms that may have confused teachers who
are not as tech savvy as others. The interview process took place during a very busy time of the
rural Texas schools where the study was performed, which could have impacted the willingness
of participation and the depth of the answers given. The very nature of online learning formats
also could have played a role in limiting the effectiveness of this research. It seems that few
teachers interviewed used the same terms for similar online learning methods. What one person
called a webinar might have been called distance learning by another and talking head by
another.

FACE-TO-FACE VS. ONLINE PD IN RURAL SCHOOLS

19

This confusion leads to an area of future research that might be beneficial to the field. It
would be helpful if the different methods of online teaching and training could be studied based
on how they are referred to by practitioners with varying degrees of experience. A survey could
be performed with a large number of respondents from a wide area with questions that include
descriptions of various type of training, each with a set of choices for what that type of training is
called. The field would also benefit from a study on which types of online training have the
most effective interactive components, which types have the most flexibility, and which types
marry these two aspects the most efficiently. Discerning that information would be a boon to
any person or organization that provides online training to adultsespecially in the education
sector.

FACE-TO-FACE VS. ONLINE PD IN RURAL SCHOOLS

20

References
Bian, H. (2013). Introduction to mixed methods research [PDF document]. Retrieved from
http://core.ecu.edu/ofe/StatisticsResearch/mixed%20methods%20new.pdf
Barab, S. A., MaKinster, J. G., Moore, J. A., & Cunningham, D. J., (2001). Designing and
building an on-line community: The struggle to support sociability in the inquiry learning
forum. Education Technology Research and Development, 49(4), 71-96.
Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the terrain.
Educational Researcher, 33(8), 3-15.
Brown, A., & Green, T. (2003). Showing up to class in pajamas (or less!): The fantasies and
realities of on-line professional development courses for teachers. The Clearing House,
76(3), 148-151.
Bruder, P. (2013). Professional development: Free, online, interactive, and engaging. The
Education Digest, 78(6), 63-65.
Carter, K. (2004). Online training: Whats really working? What does todays successful online
professional development look like?. Technology & Learning, 24(10), 32.
Creswell, J.W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches
(2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Dash, S., de Kramer, R. M., ODwyer, L. M., Masters, J., & Russell, M. (2012). Impact of online
professional development on teacher quality and student achievement in fifth grade
mathematics. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 45(1), 1-26.
Dede, C., Ketelhut, D. J., Whitehouse, P., Breit, L., & McCloskey, E. (2009). A research agenda
for online teacher professional development. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(1), 8-19.

FACE-TO-FACE VS. ONLINE PD IN RURAL SCHOOLS

21

Desimone, L., Porter, A., Garet, M. S., Yoon, K. S., & Birman, B. F. (2002). Effects of
professional development on teachers instruction: Results from a three-year longitudinal
study. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24(2), 81-112.
Dick, B. (2002). Convergent interviewing. Session 8 of AEROL - action research and evaluation
on line. Retrieved from http://www.aral.com.au/areol/areol-session08.html
Dillon, K., Dworkin, J., Gengler, C., & Olson, K. (2008). Online or face to face? A comparison
of two methods of training professionals. Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences,
100(3), 28-33.
Dinaro, J. (2011). Using Moodle to enhance online classrooms and professional development.
Distance Learning, 8(4), 41-45
Driedger, S. M. (2008). Convergent interviewing. In L. Given (Ed.), The SAGE encyclopedia of
qualitative research methods. (pp. 125-127). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications,
Inc. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781412963909.n69
Fishman, B., Konstantopoulos, S., Kubitskey, B. W., Vath, R., Park, G., Johnson, H., & Edelson,
D. C. (2013). Comparing the impact of online and face-to-face professional development
in the context of curriculum implementation. Journal of Teacher Education, 64(5), 426438.
Garet, M. S., Porter, A. C., Desimone, L., Birman, B. F., & Yoon, K. S. (2001). What makes
professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American
Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 915-945.
Guskey, T. R. (2000). Evaluating professional development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Howard, R., & McGrath, I. (Eds.). (1995). Distance education for language teachers: A UK
perspective. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.

FACE-TO-FACE VS. ONLINE PD IN RURAL SCHOOLS

22

Hutchison, A., & Colwell, J. (2012). Using a wiki to facilitate an online professional learning
community for induction and mentoring teachers. Education and Information
Technologies, 17(3), 273-289.
Lock, J. V. (2006). A new image: Online communities to facilitate teacher professional
development. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 14(4), 663-678.
Luyt, R. (2012). A framework for mixing methods in quantitative and measurement
development, validation, and revision: A case study. Journal of Mixed Methods Research,
6(4), 294-316.
Maruyama, G & Ryan, C.S. (2014). Research Methods in Social Relations. Hoboken, NJ: John
Wiley & Sons.
Orleans, A. V. (2010). Enhancing Teacher Competence through Online Training. Asia-Pacific
Education Researcher (De La Salle University Manila), 19(3), 371-386.
Reitzug, U. C. (2002). Professional development. In A. Molnar (Ed.), School reform proposals:
The research evidence (pp. 235-258). Greenwich: Information Age Publishing.
Texas Center for the Advancement of Literacy and Learning. (2011). Texas professional
development needs assessment: Statewide report. Retrieved from http://wwwtcall.tamu.edu/docs/pdf/2011-STATETeachersPDNeedsReport.pdf
Texas Education Agency. (2014a). Texas academic performance report: Breckenridge ISD [Data
file]. Retrieved from
http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/cgi/sas/broker?_service=marykay&year4=2014&year2=14&_de
bug=0&single=N&title=2014+Texas+Academic+Performance+Reports&_program=perfr
ept.perfmast.sas&prgopt=2014%2Ftapr%2Ftapr.sas&ptype=P&level=district&search=dist
rict&namenum=breckenridge&district=215901

FACE-TO-FACE VS. ONLINE PD IN RURAL SCHOOLS

23

Texas Education Agency. (2014b). Texas academic performance report: Leggett ISD [Data file].
Retrieved from
http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/cgi/sas/broker?_service=marykay&year4=2014&year2=14&_de
bug=0&single=N&title=2014+Texas+Academic+Performance+Reports&_program=perfr
ept.perfmast.sas&prgopt=2014%2Ftapr%2Ftapr.sas&ptype=P&level=district&search=dist
rict&namenum=leggett&district=187906
U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Technology. (2010). Transforming
American education: Learning powered by technology. Washington, DC.

FACE-TO-FACE VS. ONLINE PD IN RURAL SCHOOLS

Appendix
Figure A1

Figure A2

24

FACE-TO-FACE VS. ONLINE PD IN RURAL SCHOOLS

Figure A3

Figure A4

25

FACE-TO-FACE VS. ONLINE PD IN RURAL SCHOOLS

Figure A5

Figure A6

26