Executive Overview
The rapid expansion of online higher education over the past two decades has been anchored by a singular, transformative promise: flexibility. For adult learners, working professionals, and those balancing intense caregiving responsibilities, fully asynchronous graduate programs have long served as the primary gateway to continuing education. However, a quiet tension has emerged within instructional design and online pedagogy circles regarding how these programs achieve true student engagement.
At the OLC Innovate conference, a provocative idea was brought to the forefront by Dr. Tricia Bertram Gallant: fully asynchronous courses may inherently require synchronous components to truly support student success. While designed to spark debate about educational quality, connection, and rigor, this perspective has deeply unsettled educators who have spent careers building intentional, highly successful asynchronous learning environments.
To move past assumptions and emotional reactions, educators and researchers must answer a critical question: What does it mean to design asynchronous learning intentionally, and how do we decide whether synchronous activities actually serve the learners these programs are built for?
Recent institutional research—conducted by faculty at a regional public university in the Midwest and presented at OLC Accelerate—sheds much-needed light on this debate. Surveying students, instructors, and program coordinators, the study reveals that while real-time interaction can add immense value under specific conditions, mandatory synchronous elements often act as barriers rather than supports. This article explores the evolving landscape of online pedagogy, dissects the findings from recent institutional studies, and outlines five practical principles for designing inclusive, flexible, and high-quality graduate programs.
Detailed Chronology: From Provocative Keynotes to Empirical Investigation
The discourse surrounding synchronous elements in asynchronous spaces has evolved rapidly over recent academic cycles, marked by key milestones in institutional research and professional conferences.
March: The Catalyst at OLC Innovate
The conversation gained significant momentum during the OLC Innovate conference. During a prominent keynote address, Dr. Tricia Bertram Gallant argued that fully asynchronous courses require synchronous touchpoints to ensure student success and maintain robust community connection. For many online educators—particularly those teaching demanding graduate programs populated by non-traditional students—this assertion felt like a dismissal of the deliberate, scaffolded work happening in asynchronous spaces. It implied that asynchronous learning is somehow inherently deficient, requiring real-time intervention to achieve legitimacy, quality, or connection.
The Response: Listening to the Community
Rejecting the notion that quality requires synchronization, researchers and online educators turned to empirical inquiry. Rather than debating ideology, an institutional study was launched to examine how the primary stakeholders of fully asynchronous graduate programs—students, online instructors, and program coordinators—actually perceive the role of synchronous activities.
November: Unveiling Findings at OLC Accelerate
The culmination of this practice-based institutional study was formally presented at the OLC Accelerate conference in Orlando, Florida. Entitled "Synchronicity in an asynchronous world: What students, instructors, and administrators really think" (Weber, Davis, & Vick, 2025), the presentation provided qualitative and quantitative insights into the lived experiences of individuals navigating online graduate education. The findings bridged the gap between theoretical pedagogical frameworks and the messy, real-world constraints of adult learners.
Supporting Context & Metrics: What the Institutional Study Revealed
Conducted at a regional public university in the Midwest, the institutional study focused on fully asynchronous graduate programs and certificate tracks. To capture a holistic view of the educational ecosystem, the researchers gathered closed- and open-ended survey responses from three distinct stakeholder groups:
- Graduate Students: $n = 50$ (representing a 5% response rate)
- Online Instructors: $n = 11$ (representing a 26% response rate)
- Graduate Program and Certificate Coordinators: $n = 5$ (representing a 22% response rate)
While the researchers emphasize that these findings should be understood as practice-based insights rather than universally generalizable conclusions, the data mirrors the exact tensions currently facing online programs nationwide.
The Promise vs. The Reality of Flexibility
Across all stakeholder groups, participants acknowledged that synchronous activities are not inherently toxic. When deployed selectively, real-time sessions—such as orientation meetings, guest speaker appearances, complex collaborative projects, or live Q&A sessions—can accelerate clarity and foster community.
However, the narrative data highlighted significant areas where synchronous activities break down. The findings categorized these breakdowns into three primary themes:
- Misalignment with Learner Realities: Students in fully asynchronous programs are rarely traditional learners. They are parents, caregivers for aging family members, full-time employees, and community leaders. One student summarized this sentiment bluntly: "I chose to complete my education at my time. I do not mind optional events, but mandatory synchronous activities may not be easy for me to attend due to work and family obligations." When live meetings are made mandatory, they transform from supportive tools into acute stressors.
- Access and Equity Inequities: A recurring illusion in online education is that labeling a synchronous session "optional" solves access problems. The study revealed that "optional" does not equate to equitable. Time zone discrepancies, unpredictable work schedules, family obligations, and bandwidth or technology limitations disproportionately affect who can participate. One online instructor noted that adding synchronous elements alienates students facing time zone barriers, eroding the accessibility and inclusivity that drew them to asynchronous learning in the first place.
- Redundancy and Low-Value Time: Participants frequently noted that many live meetings suffered from poor design value. Much of the content delivered synchronously could easily have been disseminated via an announcement, a pre-recorded video, a Canvas module, or a discussion board post. As one student observed: "Something that can be shared in an email, announcement, or on Canvas does not need to be discussed synchronously."
Official Statements and Perspectives
The institutional study highlighted a fascinating divergence in perspective between program administrators, instructors, and students, underscoring the need for greater transparency and intentionality in course design.
- On Truth in Advertising: A graduate program coordinator interviewed during the study emphasized the concept of institutional integrity. They argued that if a course or program is marketed as asynchronous, prospective students should never be caught off guard by required synchronous obligations cropping up mid-semester. Trust is fractured when programs pivot away from their core promises.
- On the Illusion of Engagement: Instructors often fall into the trap of designing synchronous activities because live interaction feels more like "real teaching." However, educational researchers caution against designing courses based on instructor habits or nostalgia for the traditional physical classroom rather than student realities.
- On Intentional Community: Proponents of asynchronous learning emphasize that genuine connection does not require simultaneous presence. Educators who spend years in asynchronous spaces report deep familiarity with their students’ professional ambitions, personal hurdles, and intellectual passions—all cultivated through thoughtful text-based discussions, video feedback, and individualized mentorship.
Practical Principles for Better Design
Rather than entirely stripping asynchronous programs of live elements—or conversely, forcing mandatory live attendance—educators, instructional designers, and university leaders must adopt a framework of rigorous intentionality. Based on the insights from the OLC Accelerate findings, five practical design principles emerge:
1. Start with Learner Realities
Design decisions must be firmly rooted in the lived experiences of the student body. Instructors must resist the urge to add synchronous components based purely on habit, administrative preference, or romanticized notions of teaching. Before scheduling any live component, course designers should ask: Who are our learners? What are their daily obligations? What did this program promise them? What burdens might this requirement introduce? Conducting pre-semester surveys can help determine whether a session should be live, entirely asynchronous, or omitted.
2. Use Synchronous Time Only for Irreplaceable Value
Synchronous minutes are precious and should be fiercely guarded. Real-time engagement should be strictly reserved for activities that cannot be achieved effectively through asynchronous means—such as complex collaborative problem-solving, high-touch mentoring, or real-time critique. If a learning objective can be met via a well-crafted discussion board, a collaborative document, or a recorded video, the asynchronous option should take precedence.
3. Protect Flexibility Through Optionality
In fully asynchronous programs, live sessions should remain optional whenever possible. Crucially, students who cannot attend must never be penalized, either directly through grading or indirectly through missed learning opportunities. Instructors must provide robust, equivalent asynchronous pathways—such as captioned recordings, interactive transcript annotations, or alternative reflection prompts—ensuring that non-attendees experience zero deficits in their education.
4. Design for Access, Not Just Availability
Marking an event as "optional" does not absolve designers of accessibility responsibilities. Programs must proactively account for time zones, unstable internet connections, private workspace availability, and unpredictable work hours. Best practices include collecting questions prior to the session, providing fully captioned recordings promptly, and maintaining open collaborative documents where students can contribute before, during, and after the live event.
5. Be Transparent About Modality
Modality transparency is fundamentally an issue of institutional trust. Programs must explicitly state their expectations regarding live components prior to enrollment. Students deserve to know whether a program is entirely self-paced, occasionally synchronous, or reliant on live group work. Clear, upfront communication allows adult learners to make informed choices that align with their professional and personal capacities.
Future Outlook
The debate sparked at OLC Innovate and expanded upon at OLC Accelerate signifies a maturing online education sector. As institutions face increasing pressure to demonstrate student engagement and retention, the temptation to default to synchronous "fixes" will remain strong.
However, the path forward does not lie in choosing a side between asynchronous freedom and synchronous connection. Instead, the future of online graduate education demands a more sophisticated inquiry. As educators continue to evaluate data from practice-based studies, the guiding question must shift away from rigid dogmas about what "real teaching" looks like.
Ultimately, the most pressing question for instructional designers and academic leaders is not whether asynchronous courses need synchronous sessions to succeed, but rather: When does synchronous time add value that is genuinely worth the cost to learners?
If institutions can answer that question with empirical rigor, empathy, and absolute clarity, synchronous opportunities will successfully enhance online learning. If they cannot, programs must have the courage to honor their asynchronous promises and let the flexibility of their students lead the way.
References & Presentation Citation
Weber, N., Davis, C., & Vick, M. (2025, November). Synchronicity in an asynchronous world: What students, instructors, and administrators really think. Online Learning Consortium’s Accelerate Conference. Orlando, FL.
