Lohr’s findings primarily reflect favorable output with students who perform at the optimum given adequate exposure to online tools and mode of instruction compared to those who can meet the average mark in real campus situation. Dean P. R. Regier, in particular, perceives how online education can be estimated to facilitate growth in continuing education programs in a few years for the state of Arizona alone. To Mr. Regier, the flexible evolution of learning online could transform universities and K-12 schools into an ideal condition of teaching that exists not merely within the control of teacher in making students obtain knowledge but even more so, among the students themselves who are free to exploit ‘online learning management systems’ or use ‘social networking technology’ as a platform to conduct university-wide forums or group studies toward interactive learning.
Zondiros, however, reserves further concern on examining online education in the context of a globalized economy wherein access to proper education as well as issues of inequality and exclusion are of huge significance and are also affected by factors that are socio-cultural, economic, political, and technological in nature. While the article has already established a basic assumption that learning via online approach is highly contributive, Zondiros notes Harvey’s that “space, time and money are sources of value and power and the mass of workers does not have them; so, the workers that do not have them cannot have access to Online and Distance Education even they could be benefited by it.” Based on Orfano’s article, despite such global constraints, still, online education can impact learners negatively or positively claiming that as one disadvantage “students do not hang out in the student union and sit at tables with classmates” anymore whereas others are rather inclined to view online education