The first area where cyber education poses difficulties is with isolation with restricted face-to-face peer interactions. A study by Lee & Chan (2007) found negative effects of distance learning at universities, as distance learners had a significantly higher rate of dropping out. The article mentions that a lack of belonging to a community through social ties is a distinct disadvantage. In addition, the inability to interact face-to-face with students can hinder motivation and enthusiasm (Lee & Chan, 2007). Social isolation can also be a problem if the student wastes time by pursuing material that is not of relevant importance to the instructor. Such proper direction could be clarified better in face-to-face interaction (Lee & Chan, 2007).
Additionally, non-verbal cues to learning are not available with cyber schooling. This includes the teacher’s ability to pick up on subtle signals of student interest, student understanding, or student confusion. The subtle ways that face-to-face interaction can reveal emotions related to learning are more present in the traditional classroom (Lee & Chan, 2007).
The second way that cyber schooling is at a perceived disadvantage is through uncertainty in the quality of cyber education. Rosendale (2009) points out how problems result from cyber schooling programs that have either low quality assurance or no quality assurance guidelines in place. Also, there is disagreement on what learning quality entails (Rosendale, 2009). The article goes on to show that test scores show how cyber school students are lagging behind traditional schools in test results (Rosendale, 2009). An example is with the Pennsylvania System of School Assessment (PSSA) test results. They found “of the 11 cyber charter schools in Pennsylvania, only 3 are meeting or exceeding the “No Child Left Behind”