Expectations for online distance delivery of higher education courses and programmes are increasing globally, begging the question, 'Does modality matter?' Pedagogic research comparing online and face-to-face learningdemands more examination, particularly synchronous delivery. The purpose of this empirical study is to determine whether the quality of learning differs between Master's groups of aspiring leaders (inservice teachers) based on instruction received synchronously online and in-person. Best practices in curriculum and leadership within a constructivist context were scrutinised, with cognitive performances relative to delivery mode compared. Guiding this study were the community of inquiry (CoI) framework and two questions: 'Did student learning vary between groups completing the same course?' and 'Did students' cognitive learning capacity for making meaning change from one constructivist environment to the next?' For both groups, eight data sources (i.e. documents) were collected and analysed. Upon examination, perspectives on technology, mathematics and reading were justice-oriented. For both cohorts, a strong cognitive orientation favouring equity and socially just schooling was revealed. Without noticeable variance between groups, the real-time, computer-based classroom proved equally effective to the physical classroom. This noteworthy result is addressed. As postsecondary institutions utilise distance formats, the latest knowledge resulting from a strategic side-by-side comparison can prove beneficial.