Transactional Distance among Open University Students: How Does it Affect the Learning Process?

Amanda Kassandrinou 1 , Christina Angelaki 1  and Ilias Mavroidis 1
  • 1 Hellenic Open University, School of Humanities [], Patras, Greece


This study examines the presence of transactional distance among students, the factors affecting it, as well as the way it influences the learning process of students in a blended distance learning setting in Greece. The present study involved 12 postgraduate students of the Hellenic Open University (HOU). A qualitative research was conducted, using information collected via individual semi-structured interviews. Content analysis of the gathered information provided evidence regarding the existence of student-student transactional distance for several reasons, such as geographical and relatively limited face to face interaction. The role of the tutor as well as of the course provider were also examined in this respect. Finally the study indicated that the existence of perceived transactional distance among the students has a negative effect on their learning process.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • 1. Anastasiades, P. and Iliadou, C. (2010). Communication between tutors- students in DL. A case study of the Hellenic Open University. In European Journal of Open, Distance and E-learning, 13(2). Retrieved on April 10, 2012 from:

  • 2. Anderson, T. (2003). Getting the Mix Right Again: An updated and theoretical rationale for interaction. In International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 4(2).

  • 3. Anderson, T. and Dron, J. (2011). Three Generations of Distance Education Pedagogy. In International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(3), (pp. 80-97).

  • 4. Angelaki, C. and Mavroidis, I. (2013). Communication and Social Presence: The impact on adult Learners’ emotions in distance learning. In European Journal of Open, Distance and e- Learning, 16(1), (pp. 78-93).

  • 5. Barker, S. (2003). Introducing group work and communication skills for external students: an analysis of the use of asynchronous online tools. In G. Crisp, D. Thiele, I. Scholten, S. Barker & J. Baron (eds.), Interact, Integrate, Impact: Proceedings of the 20th Annual Conference of the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education. Adelaide, 7-10 December 2003.

  • 6. Benson, R. and Samarawickrema, G. (2009). Addressing the context of e-learning: using transactional distance theory to inform design. In Distance Education, 30(1), (pp. 5-21).

  • 7. Bird, M.; Hammersley, M.; Gomm, R. and Woods, P. (1999). Educational Research in Practice.Study Manual. Patras, HOU Press.

  • 8. Bischoff, W.R. (1993). Transactional distance, interactive television, and electronic mail communication in graduate public health and nursing courses: Implications for professional education. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Hawaii.

  • 9. Bischoff, W.R.; Bisconer, S.W.; Kooker, B.M. and Woods, L.C. (1996). Transactional distance and interactive television in the distance education of health professionals. In American Journal of Distance Education, 10(3), (pp. 4-19).

  • 10. Bradley, J. (1993). Methodological issues and practices in qualitative research. In The Library Quarterly, 63(1), (pp. 431-449).

  • 11. Chen, Y.J. (2001a). Transactional distance in World Wide Web learning environments. In Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 55(4), (pp. 327-338).

  • 12. Chen, Y.J. (2001b). Dimensions of transactional distance in World Wide Web learning environment: A factor analysis. In British Journal of Educational Technology, 52(4), (pp. 459-470).

  • 13. Chen, Y.J. and Willits, F.K. (1998). A path analysis of the concepts in Moore’s theory of transactional distance in a videoconferencing learning environment. In The American Journal of Distance Education, 13(2), (pp. 51-65).

  • 14. Clair, R.S. and Fite, S. (2005). Far off Voices: Social Capital and Distance Education. In A.Lionarakis (ed), 1st Panhellenic Conference for Open and Distance Education. Pedagogical and Technological Applications. Conference Proceedings. Vol. A, (pp.13-19). Athens : Propompos.

  • 15. Cohen, L.; Manion, L. and Morrison, K. (2007). Research Methods in Education. 6th edition.Routledge.

  • 16. Conrad, D. (2005). Building and Maintaining Community in Cohort -Based Online Learning.In Journal of Distance Education, 20(1), (pp. 1-20).

  • 17. Dabbagh, N. (2004). Distance learning: emerging pedagogical issues and learning designs. In Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 5(1), (pp. 37-49).

  • 18. Deschenes, A.J. (1996). Un programme d’initiation a la formation a distance de type constructiviste: Un réseau de communication pour l’apprentissage. In Distances, 1(2), (pp. 15-34). Retrieved on June 8, 2012 from

  • 19. Dewey, J. and Bentley, A. (1949). Knowing and the Known. Beacon Press, Boston.

  • 20. Dron, J.; Seidel, C. and Litten, G. (2004). Transactional distance in a blended learning environment. In ALT-F: Research in Learning Technology, 12(2), (pp. 163-174).

  • 21. Dron,J. (2006). Social software and the emergence of control. In Proceedings of the sixth IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT 2006), (pp. 41-45). Kerkra, The Netherlands IEEE.

  • 22. Dron, J. (2007a). Control and Constraint in e-learning: Choosing when to choose. Hershey, PA: Information Science Publishing.

  • 23. Dron, J. (2007b). Designing the undesignable. Social software and control. In Educational Technology & Society, 10(3), (pp. 60-71).

  • 24. Farquhar, L. (2013). The intersection of dialogue and low transactional distance: considerations for Higher Education. In European Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 16(2), 28-39.

  • 25. Force, D. (2004). Relationships among transactional distance variables in asynchronous computer conferences: A correlational study. Unpublished Master Thesis Athabasca University.

  • 26. Garrison, R. (2000). Theoretical challenges for Distance Education in the 21st century: A swift from structural to transactional issues. In The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 1(1), Retrieved on October 10, 2011 from:

  • 27. Garrison, D.R. (2009). Implications of online learning for the conceptual development and practice of distance education. In Journal of Distance Education, 23(2), (pp. 93-104).

  • 28. Giossos, I. (2009). Validity and reliability of transactional distance in the framework of Hellenic Open University. Dissertation. Course: Studies in Education, School of Humanities, Patras, Hellenic Open University. (in Greek with English abstract)

  • 29. Giossos, I.; Mavroidis, I. and Koutsouba, M. (2008). Research in distance education: review and perspectives. In Open Education, 4(1), (pp. 49-60). In Greek with English abstract.

  • 30. Giossos, I.; Koutsouba, M.; Lionarakis, A. and Skavantzos, K. (2009). Reconsidering Moore’s transactional distance Theory. In European Journal of Open Distance and ELearning, 2009(2), (pp. 1-6).

  • 31. Gokool-Ramdoo, S. (2008). Beyond the Theoretical Impasse: Extending the applications of Transactional Distance Theory. In International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, (9)3.

  • 32. Gunawardena, C.N. and McIsaac, M.S. (2004). Distance Education. In D.H. Jonassen (ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications & technology, (pp. 355-395), (2nd Edition).London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

  • 33. Herbert, M. (2006). Staying the Course: A study in online student satisfaction and retention.In Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 9(4).

  • 34. Hillman, D.C.; Willis, D.J. and Gunawardena, C.N. (1994). Learner interface Interaction in distance education: An extension of contemporary models and Strategies for practitioners. In The American Journal of Distance Education, 8(2), (pp. 30-42).

  • 35. Jung, I. (2001). Building a theoretical framework of Web-based instruction in the context of distance education. In British Journal of Educational Technology, 32(5), (pp. 525-534).

  • 36. Kanuka, H.; Collet, D. and Caswell, C. (2002). University instructor perceptions of use of asynchronous text-based discussion in distance courses. In The American Journal of Distance Education, 16(3), (pp. 151-167).

  • 37. Lemone, K. (2005). Analysing Cultural Influences on E-Learning Transactional Issues. In G.Richards (ed.), Proceedings of World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 2005, (pp. 2637-2644). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.

  • 38. Liu, G.; Liu, Y.; Liang, G.; Song, J.; Liao, J.; Li, G. and Lin, M. (2004). Comparison of ELearning in Distance Education in Different Cultural Settings. In G. Richards (ed.), Proceedings of World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 2004, (pp. 370-374). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.

  • 39. Loizidou-Hatzitheodoulou, P.; Vasala, P.; Kakouris, Α.; Mavroidis, I.; Tassios, T. (2001).Types of communication in distance learning and their contribution to the educational process. The case of the students of the postgraduate module “Open and Distance Education” of HOU. In the Proceedings - 1st Panhellenic Conference for Open and Distance Education (in Greek with English abstract).

  • 40. Mavroidis, I.; Karatrantou, A.; Koutsouba, M.; Giossos, Y.; Papadakis, S. (2013). Technology Acceptance and Social Presence in Distance Education. A case Study on the Use of Teleconference at a Postgraduate Course of the Hellenic Open University. In European Journal of Open Distance and e-Learning, 16(2). Retrieved on November 27, 2013 from:

  • 41. Moore, M.G. (1997). Theory of Transactional distance. In D. Keegan (ed.), Theoretical Principles of Distance Education, (pp. 22-38). New York: Routledge.

  • 42. Moore, M. and Kearsley, G. (1996). Distance Education: A systems review. Belmont CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company.

  • 43. Moss, D. (2004). Creating space for learning: Conceptualising women & higher education through space & time. In Gender & Education, 16(3), (pp. 283-362).

  • 44. Μüller, T. (2008). Persistence of Women in on line Degree Completion Programs. In International Review of Research in Open & Distance Learning, 9(2), (pp. 1-18).

  • 45. Parrott, S. (1995). Future Learning: Distance Education in Community Colleges. ERIC Digest No.ED385311.

  • 46. Pavlakis, A. and Kaitelidou, D. (2012) Burnout Syndrome in Students of a Distance Learning Program: The Open University of Cyprus Experience. In European Journal of Open, Distance and E-learning, 15(1). Retrieved on March 8, 2013 from:

  • 47. Richardson, C.J. and Swan, K. (2003). Examining social presence in online courses in relation to students’ perceived learning & satisfaction. In Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7(1), (pp. 68-88).

  • 48. Rovai, A.P. and Baker, J.D. (2005). Gender Differences in Online Learning: Sense of community, perceived learning, and interpersonal interactions. In Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 6(1), (pp. 31-44).

  • 49. Saba, F. and Shearer, R. (1994). Verifying key theoretical concepts in a dynamic model of distance education. In The American Journal of Distance Education, 9(1), (pp. 36-59).

  • 50. Saenz, B.L. (2002). Students’ perceptions of Social Presence and its value in Asynchronous Web-based Master’s Instructional Program. PhD Thesis Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University.

  • 51. Sarakatsanou, E. (2007). Tutor-Student Communication at the Hellenic Open University. Students perceptions of two postgraduate course: Studies in Education and Adult Education. M.Ed Dissertation.Patras, Hellenic Open University (in Greek with English abstract).

  • 52. Simpson, O. (2003). Student retention in online, open and distance learning. London: Kogan Page.

  • 53. Stein, S.D.; Wanstreet, E.C.; Calvin, J.; Overtoom, C. and Wheaton, E.J. (2005). Bridging the Transactional Distance Gap in Online Learning Environments. In The American Journal of Distance Education, 19(2), (pp. 105-118).

  • 54. Schellens, T. and Valcke, M. (2006). Fostering knowledge construction in university students through asynchronous discussion groups. In Computers & Education, 46(4), (pp. 349-370).

  • 55. Terre Blanche, M.; Durrheim, K. and Painter, D. (eds.) (2006). Research in practice: Applied methods for the social sciences. Cape Town: University of Cape Town Press.

  • 56. Tait, A. (2003). Reflection on Student Support in Open & Distance Learning. In The International Review of Research in Open & Distance Learning, 4(1). Retrieved on February 2, 2011 from:

  • 57. Tzoutza, S. (2010). Face-to-face tutorials: The views of postgraduate students and their tutors at the Hellenic Open University. The case of postgraduate course on “Open and Distance Education” at Hellenic Open University. In Open Education, 6(1-2), (pp. 46-65). In Greek with English abstract.

  • 58. Terhemba, N. (2006). Interactivity in distance education: The National Open University of Nigeria (NOUN) experience. In Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education - TOJDE, (7)4, Article 9. Retrieved on May 25, 2012 from:

  • 59. Wilson, Τ. and Whitelock, D. (1998). What are the perceived benefits of participating in a computer-mediated communication (CMC) environment for distance learning computer science students? In Computers & Education, 36(3/4), (pp. 259-269).

  • 60. Zhang, A. (2003). Transactional distance in web-based college learning environments: Toward measurement and theory construction. PhD Thesis. Virginia Commonwealth University.


Journal + Issues