Face-to-Face vs E-Learning for Entry Level 3 Learners

When mature learners with minimal qualifications return to education, does the delivery method make all the difference? This compelling action research project by Ummera Iqbal tackles a question many adult education providers grapple with daily.

The study focuses on entry level 3 literacy learners – adults who often left school with few or no qualifications and are now seeking to improve their reading, writing, speaking and listening skills. Many are in their 40s and beyond, having spent careers in manual labour, factory work, or warehouse environments where computer use was unnecessary.

What makes this research particularly valuable is its real-world context. The participants weren't theoretical subjects but actual learners struggling with modern e-learning platforms. Half had never used computers before, and three-quarters found accessing their online courses difficult or very hard. Some had mild dyslexia, others were ESOL learners with limited English, and many attended only because job centre requirements meant their benefits depended on it.

The findings paint a clear picture. While e-learning offers flexibility and independence, it created significant barriers for these specific learners. Frustration levels ran high, with students frequently taking unplanned breaks, accidentally losing work through poor computer skills, and some even leaving sessions in anger after technical difficulties.

Through interviews, questionnaires, observations, and progress reviews, the research revealed that most participants preferred face-to-face teaching. They valued human interaction, found traditional methods less stressful, and felt more motivated when learning alongside peers rather than staring at screens.

The study doesn't dismiss e-learning entirely but suggests a blended approach might work better. Recommendations include offering basic computer courses first, embedding ICT skills gradually within face-to-face sessions, and negotiating with providers for programmes that split delivery 50/50 between online and classroom teaching.

This research resonates because it puts learners first. Rather than assuming technology automatically improves education, it asks whether current delivery methods actually serve the most vulnerable students. The honest findings challenge institutions to consider whether their drive toward digital learning might inadvertently exclude those who need education most.

For educators working with similar demographics, this study offers practical insights and evidence-based recommendations that could transform how we support adult learners transitioning back into education.