Research on Distance Education: In defense of field experiments

This article extends the issues and arguments raised in Bernard, Abrami, Lou, and Borokhovski (Distance Education, 25(2), 175–198, 2004 Bernard, R. M., Abrami, P. C., Lou, Y. and Borokhovski, E. 2004a. A methodological morass? How we can improve the quality of quantitative research in distance education. Distance Education, 25(2): 175–198. Taylor & Francis Online , Google Scholar) regarding the design of quantitative, particularly experimental research in distance education. A single experimental, study from the distance education literature is examined from six different perspectives to show the differences between preexperiments, true experiments, and quasi‐experiments in terms of their impact on interpretability and generalizability (i.e., internal and external validity). Arguments for and against experimentation are discussed and the article ends with a description of meta‐analysis, the quantitative synthesis of experimental research, and its potential for providing answers to questions that no single study can adequately address.