Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
Plant Science Today (PST)

Review Articles

Vol. 12 No. 2 (2025)

Navigating open and distance learning trends, advantages, challenges and innovations for the future education - A systematic review

DOI
https://doi.org/10.14719/pst.8108
Submitted
6 March 2025
Published
05-05-2025 — Updated on 19-05-2025
Versions

Abstract

Open and Distance Learning (ODL) has revolutionized education by enhancing accessibility, flexibility and technology-driven learning methodologies. This study examines the trends, challenges and innovations in ODL through a bibliometric analysis of research published between 2002 and 2024. Using bibliometric techniques such as citation analysis, co-authorship analysis and keyword co-occurrence mapping, the study identifies key research trends and emerging themes in ODL. The findings indicate a steady increase in ODL research, with a notable rise in publications post-2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic, which accelerated global adoption of digital learning. This study highlights the economic, social, psychological and infrastructural factors shaping ODL. Affordability and reduced travel costs make ODL financially viable, while strong social support systems enhance student motivation. Psychological aspects, including self-efficacy and adaptability, contribute to student success and robust digital infrastructure plays a crucial role in effective ODL implementation. Despite its advantages, ODL faces significant challenges, such as digital accessibility issues, high dropout rates and concerns over educational quality. To mitigate these challenges, institutions must enhance content delivery, foster student engagement and ensure equitable access to digital resources. Future research is expected to focus on integrating artificial intelligence, virtual reality and adaptive learning to enhance personalized education experiences. Maximize ODL’s impact requires collaboration among educators, policymakers and technology developers to create inclusive and effective learning environments. By addressing existing barriers and leveraging emerging technologies, ODL can continue to shape the future of education globally.

References

  1. 1. Saidi RM, Sharip AA, Abd Rahim NZ, Zulkifli ZA, Zain SM. Evaluating students’ preferences of Open and Distance Learning (ODL) tools. Procedia Computer Science. 2021;179:955–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2021.01.085
  2. 2. Nouby A, Alkhazali T. The effect of designing a blended learning environment on achievement and deep learning of graduate students at the Arabian Gulf University. Open Journal of Social Sciences. 2017;5(10):248–60. https://doi.org/10.4236/jss.2017.510022
  3. 3. Azhari FA, Ming LC. Review of e-learning practice at the tertiary education level in Malaysia. Indian Journal of Pharmaceutical Education and Research. 2015;49(4):248–57. https://doi.org/10.5530/ijper.49.4.2
  4. 4. Adams D, Sumintono B, Mohamed A, Noor NS. E-learning readiness among students of diverse backgrounds in a leading Malaysian higher education institution. Malaysian Journal of Learning and Instruction. 2018;15(2):227–56. https://doi.org/10.32890/mjli
  5. 5. Pringle TA, Robinson MD. The diversity advantage: An explanatory framework for personality traits. European Journal of Personality. 2024;38(6):867–88. https://doi.org/10.1177/08902070241228327
  6. 6. Chyr WL, Shen PD, Chiang YC, Lin JB, Tsai CW. Exploring the effects of online academic help-seeking and flipped learning on improving students’ learning. Journal of Educational Technology & Society. 2017;20(3):11–23. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11215968
  7. 7. Kant N. Competitiveness in ODL from stakeholders’ perspective: a review and research agenda. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education. 2019;20(3):59–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.17718/tojde.598221
  8. 8. Jung I, Wong TM, Li C, Baigaltugs S, Belawati T. Quality assurance in Asian distance education: Diverse approaches and common culture. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning. 2011;12(6):63–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v12i6.991
  9. 9. Perraton H. Aims and purpose. In: Lentell H, Perraton H, editors. Policy for open and distance learning. London: Routledge; 2003. p. 288. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203464403
  10. 10. Itow RC. Fostering valuable learning experiences by transforming current teaching practices: practical pedagogical approaches from online practitioners. Information and Learning Sciences. 2020;121(5/6):443–52. https://doi.org/10.1108/ILS-04-2020-0106
  11. 11. Citraningtyas CE. Addressing optimism among the young Indonesian generation in sustaining the pandemic. Jurnal Ilmu Sosial Dan Humaniora. 2021;10(2):279–89. https://doi.org/10.23887/jish-undiksha.v10i2.33469
  12. 12. Rocha Trindade A, Carmo H, Bidarra J. Current developments and best practice in open and distance learning. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning. 2000;1(1):1–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v1i1.7
  13. 13. Van Eck NJ, Waltman L. VOSviewer Manual Versi 2.6. 18. Leiden: Univeristeit Leiden; 2022.
  14. 14. Van Eck NJ, Waltman L. Manual for VOSviewer version 1 .6.20. CWTS Meaningful Metrics. University, of Leiden; 2023:6. Available from: https://www. vosviewer. com/docume ntation/Manual_VOSviewer_1
  15. 15. Bhat WA, Khan NL, Manzoor A, Dada ZA, Qureshi RA. How to conduct bibliometric analysis using R-studio: a practical guide. European Economic Letters (EEL). 2023;13(3):681–700. http://dx.doi.org/10.52783/eel.v13i3.350
  16. 16. Kurulgan M. A bibliometric analysis of research on dropout in open and distance learning. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education. 2024;25(4):200–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.17718/tojde.1355394
  17. 17. Cazoni C, Ciocoiu CN, Pircalaboiu A, Prioteasa A. Digitalization of management: Evolutionary approach and bibliometric analysis. Journal of Eastern Europe Research in Business and Economics. 2024;2024:909584. https://doi.org/10.5171/2024.909584
  18. 18. Aydemir M, Özkeskin EE, Akkurt AA. A theoretical framework on open and distance learning. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2015;174:1750–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.833
  19. 19. Arinto PB. Issues and challenges in open and distance e-learning: Perspectives from the Philippines. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning. 2016;17(2):162–80. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v17i2.1913
  20. 20. Pascarella ET, Terenzini PT. Predicting freshman persistence and voluntary dropout decisions from a theoretical model. The Journal of Higher Education. 1980;51(1):60–75. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.1980.11780030
  21. 21. Al U, Tonta Y. At?f analizi: Hacettepe Üniversitesi Kütüphanecilik Bölümü tezlerinde at?f yap?lan kaynaklar. Bilgi dünyas?. 2004;5(1):19–47. https://doi.org/10.15612/BD.2004.497
  22. 22. Pauna VH, Buonocore E, Renzi M, Russo GF, Franzese PP. The issue of microplastics in marine ecosystems: A bibliometric network analysis. Marine Pollution Bulletin. 2019;149:110612. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2019.110612
  23. 23. Masalimova AR, Khvatova MA, Chikileva LS, Zvyagintseva EP, Stepanova VV, Melnik MV. Distance learning in higher education during COVID-19. In: Frontiers in Education. Vol. 7. Frontiers Media SA; 2022. p. 822958. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.822958
  24. 24. Rad FA, Otaki F, Baqain Z, Zary N, Al-Halabi M. Rapid transition to distance learning due to COVID-19: Perceptions of postgraduate dental learners and instructors. PloS ONE. 2021;16(2):e0246584. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0253683
  25. 25. De Bakker FG, Groenewegen P, Den Hond F. A bibliometric analysis of 30 years of research and theory on corporate social responsibility and corporate social performance. Business & society. 2005;44(3):283–317. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0007650305278086
  26. 26. Ozturk O. Bibliometric review of resource dependence theory literature: an overview. Management Review Quarterly. 2021;71(3):525–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11301-020-00192-8
  27. 27. Lee Y, Choi J. A review of online course dropout research: Implications for practice and future research. Educational Technology Research and Development. 2011;59:593–618. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11423-010-9177-y
  28. 28. Fozdar BI, Kumar LS, Kannan S. A survey of a study on the reasons responsible for student dropout from the Bachelor of Science Programme at Indira Gandhi National Open University. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning. 2006;7(3):1–5. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v7i3.291
  29. 29. Bean JP, Metzner BS. A conceptual model of nontraditional undergraduate student attrition. Review of Educational Research. 1985;55(4):485–540. https://doi.org/10.2307/1170245
  30. 30. Street H. Factors influencing a learner’s decision to drop-out or persist in higher education distance learning. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration. 2010;13(4):1–5. http://dx.doi.org/10.24059/olj.v13i3.1659
  31. 31. Karim MW, Haque A, Ulfy MA, Hossin MS. Factors influencing student satisfaction towards distance learning apps during the coronavirus (Covid-19) pandemic in Malaysia. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development. 2021;10:245–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.6007/IJARPED/v10-i2/9546
  32. 32. Holder B. An investigation of hope, academics, environment, and motivation as predictors of persistence in higher education online programs. The Internet and Higher Education. 2007;10(4):245–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2007.08.002
  33. 33. Karakoç Öztürk B. A mixed-method study on the distance education process experienced in the faculties of education. SAGE Open. 2024;14(1):21582440241227769. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440241227769
  34. 34. Kadiresan V, Sujin J, Ab Rahim H, Rasu F. Motivating factors influencing online learning among university students: A study of a private university in Malaysia. Journal of Social Science Studies. 2021;8(2):88. https://doi.org/10.5296/jsss.v8i2.18926
  35. 35. Mbodila M, Mbodila M, Legg-Jack DW. Tracing factors that influence students’ success in open distance learning at South African higher education institutions. Journal of Studies in Social Sciences and Humanities. 2023;9(1):72–82. http://dx.doi.org/10.31920/2050-4284/2019/8n3a11
  36. 36. Saleem F, AlNasrallah W, Malik MI, Rehman SU. Factors affecting the quality of online learning during COVID-19: Evidence from a developing economy. In: Frontiers in Education. Vol. 7. Frontiers Media SA; 2022. p. 847571. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.847571
  37. 37. Mittelmeier J, Rienties B, Rogaten J, Gunter A, Raghuram P. Internationalisation at a Distance and at Home: Academic and social adjustment in a South African distance learning context. International Journal of Intercultural Relations. 2019;72:1–2. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2019.06.001
  38. 38. Williamson B, Eynon R, Potter J. Pandemic politics, pedagogies and practices: digital technologies and distance education during the coronavirus emergency. Learning, Media and Technology. 2020;45(2):107–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2020.1761641
  39. 39. Gaskell A, Mills R. The quality and reputation of open, distance and e-learning: what are the challenges? Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning. 2014;29(3):190–205. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680513.2014.993603
  40. 40. Forsyth H, Pizzica J, Laxton R, Mahony MJ. Distance education in an era of eLearning: challenges and opportunities for a campus?focused institution. Higher Education Research & Development. 2010;29(1):15–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360903421350
  41. 41. Murphy A. Open educational practices in higher education: Institutional adoption and challenges. Distance Education. 2013;34(2):201–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2013.793641
  42. 42. Baxto da Silva W, Amaro R, Mattar J. Distance education and the Open University of Brazil: History, structure, and challenges. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning. 2019;20(4):99–115. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v20i4.4132
  43. 43. Dash BM. Social work education through open and distance learning in India: opportunities and challenges. Social Work Education. 2018;37(6):813–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/02615479.2018.1481204
  44. 44. Dash BM, Botcha R. Social work education through open and distance learning: an Indian perspective. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education. 2018;19(2):149–65. https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.415829

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.