University of Maryland University College

Theory of Distance Education Based on Empathy

Prof. Brje Holmberg:
September 15, 2004

08/13/14

Transcribed By:
Word Pro Services, Inc.
1463 White Path Trail
Canton, Georgia 30114
770-345-2465
e-mail: linda@wordpro-transcripts.com

Theory of Distance Education Based on Empathy

Holmberg:
September 15, 2004
Page 1

Holmberg:

so it will take some time. I said I would talk a little about the empathy approach
to distance education. And that is really an extremely simple thought. A very, very
simple thought. We all are aware, aren't we, that if we read something, we hear
something that is simple, that appeals to us personally, that makes us feel that we
belong to a group, that we belong to a sort of community, then it's easier to learn
than if we just read or listen to something really neutral. I think that is the simple
thing that everybody would agree on. That that is a fact. When we feel that
something attracts us, then it's easier to follow what is being said, it's easier to
learn. The question is, how can this be practiced in distance education? Well, it's a
pet idea of mine which I actually expressed the first time in my very first
monograph on distance education, published in 1960, quite a few years ago. I just,
there, unfortunately, I talked about the didactic conversation. I don't like the
expression didactic conversation because didactic, to many English speaking
people, particularly in the U.K., means that if you do something in a didactic way,
you lay down the rules, you tell people what things are. It's also a sort of
authoritarian approach. And my approach is something entirely different from
something that is authoritarian. I began thinking a little about this and gradually I
have looked into this a little more seriously. What does it really mean? Well, in
distance education we have reason to talk about two essential components. On the
one hand, the presentation of learning matter. On the other hand, interaction with
students. Now you may say that no longer applies if you have conferencing,
because you can produce facts, you can produce learning matter at the same time
as you arrange interaction, as the same time as you have a seminar. That is true,
but nevertheless, there are facts to be learned. There are things you have to pick
up from literature and so on. Now, my general idea about this, when I started, was
why on earth should we, when we teach at the distance, why should we present a
sort of neutral handbook presentation? Why should we just write like everybody
who writes a handbook? Why shouldn't we address the students more personally?
Why shouldn't we say, for instance, now in print, now this is tricky, you may draw
the conclusion that so and so, because of what we said in that context, but please
remember, in that other context, there is this or that to be thought of. Compare
what is said in this presentation now with what you read in an earlier presentation.
This applies when you write particular material for distance education students.
Which is the normal case. I just checked with the Distance Educational Training
Council, teaching more than two million students, it's even in America, the normal
approach, that you have on the one hand teaching material for students cause
students to submit assignments and then on the other hand you may have seminars
and so on.
Now, this seems quite self-evident, but it isn't. If you look at most distance
education courses in the world, printed for distance education -- don't talk about

Theory of Distance Education Based on Empathy

Holmberg:
September 15, 2004
Page 2

handbooks that you use for you very often do that, of course. But if you take
material printed just for distance education, you will see that they very rarely fully
make use of that approach. They may try to be helpful, they are helpful to some
extent. But they are not as helpful as they could be, because they are not personal
enough. They don't address the student personally. They are so afraid of not being
scholarly, that they miss this opportunity. I'll come back to that in a minute. I have
some very practical experiences.
I think there are some chairs available for you who have come in late, there's one
there, two here.
Now, that's one approach. That's the presentation learning material. And then on
the other hand you have a personal approach in the communication between the
students and tutors and we'll talk later about also communication between
students, among them. There again, you have the same personal approach. Why
shouldn't we just address the students in a very personal way, talking about the
individual student's difficulties. When the student makes a mistake, why shouldn't
we explain to him, or her, in the personal way, not being so terribly scholarly in
our expressions, but being very, shall we say, sympathetic. By trying to show that
we are on the same level of the students. In more of a sort of that we are equals.
Now, this is a general principle. How do we practice this?
First, when I looked at this, I thought it might be worthwhile making empirical
examinations of the whole idea. So I prepared, I made three studies. First one was,
I wrote a course for distance educators in my sort of language, that was in the
series that Gene Rubin just referred to. It was a long time ago, it was around 1980.
And then I asked the students, what do you think of this? It was entirely different
from the normal presentations because it was this conversational approach,
exactly that's the word, conversational. There's a dialogue. I imitated a dialogue
with the students, foreseeing the replies, foreseeing the reactions students would
have, and discussed with the students, as though I had somebody in front of me.
And I asked the students, what do you think of this? And that first examination
showed that students were enthusiastic that that is the way to write. Now, they had
nothing to compare with, so it really didn't say much. So I went on to do
something else.
There was at FernUniversitaet, a course for post graduate students on educational
planning, which was written in a very solid German way, the sentences were long
like this and so on. I approached the author and said, would you mind if I used
your course for a study, I'll re-write part of the course, and we'll see how the
students react. So I did. I translated from the author's scholarly German into my
very simple German, in which I approached this conversational approach. I talked
with the students about the various matters, suggesting things and so on, but kept

Theory of Distance Education Based on Empathy

Holmberg:
September 15, 2004
Page 3

it exactly the same content, there isn't a word of it that is new, it is exactly the
content of the old course. And yet the students got half -- not all students, the
experimental group -- got half of the course in the traditional form and half in my
form, with my simple German text, my conversational, it's not simple, its
conversational text. And what did the students say? The vast majority preferred
my text. But this being Germany, some students said it really isn't scholarly, it's
so, so simple. But the worst comment came from the author of the original text,
who told me -- my name must never be mentioned in context with this because
this is so simple that anybody can understand it! Now, he didn't realize what he
commented on his own presentation. But that was all in favor, but still only
vaguely in favor of my way of presentation.
Then I did something else. I took a course, written in English for Swedish
students, a course of English grammar. Again, I had contact with the original
author and I re-wrote it in my conversational way, discussing with students, you
know English is not all that easy. Why do you say, I met him yesterday, and not, I
have met him yesterday. So many people would say, coming from abroad. There
are lots of things like that. Now, I re-wrote it in my fashion, discussing with the
students. And then I asked the students what they thought, first of all. And then I
had a very interesting reply. I had Swedish, English, and German students, all the
Swedish students, all the English students said they much preferred my
presentation, this conversational approach. But not all the German students. The
majority of them did, the vast majority. I don't remember the exact figures now,
but the vast majority did prefer my presentation, but some were a little bit
cautious, they said, this has no academic dignity. It is not up to the standards of
what we expect from an academic course. And there I would like to comment a
little about the German attitude. Now, in Germany, you still make a very strict
distinction between the scholarly universities and those concerned with practical
matters. If you are a professor at a traditional university, your are a universitaets
professor. I'm an universitaets professor. But nevertheless -- well And the
others, so-called Fachoschule, which are the universities teaching at a more
modest level also and it is probably the dignity of the old universities that has
something to do with it. A couple of Germans, not only a couple, but a few of the
German students thought it was not, my approach did not agree with what they
expected of academic dignity. But they learnt from it! But! I thought, it's not
enough. I've asked students what they think, let's see what does this lead to. So I
had organized it in a controlled group, an experimental group and the
experimental group took my version of the course, the control group took the old
version. And then I looked at the outcomes. And now I should have liked to tell
you that my version was much more successful than the other one. It was more
successful, but not much more successful. There's no statistical significance. My
students, those are those taking my version, were slightly better, they had a
slightly better, shall we say, they continued, they completed the course slightly

Theory of Distance Education Based on Empathy

Holmberg:
September 15, 2004
Page 4

better than the other students. But not all that much. So I cannot claim, statistical
significance for the outcomes. I just say, students were a little more successful and
they liked it very much.
I think, personally, that an American group of students would much prefer this
conversational approach. I don't think you have that academic tradition that makes
it important to express yourself in a very academic way. I may be wrong. But I
dont think so. In any case, that was the outcome of these studies of mine.
And then I have looked at what has happened after that. The FernUniversitaet
courses are to a great extent, written according to my principles of this
conversational approach. There is more of that sort of presentation, we simulate
dialogue much more. So that's why I always also talk about the presentational
learning matter, if you write of course, that's part of the dialogue where you
simulate a dialogue, you simulate a conversation.
Now if we then turn to the other aspect, the real interaction, when students submit
assignments, let's take this first, which is very common, people write a certain part
of a course, then they submit an assignment, which is corrected and commented
on by the tutor and returned to the students. Then, again, it's very possible to be,
for us to be the neutral observer, to say that is wrong, obviously you've made a
mistake there, it should be really this or that and so on, but you can also discuss
with the students and say, now you drew the wrong conclusion there because you
thought so and so, but and explain fully to the student, it takes time, it costs
money, but it is successful.
One of the things that we have all -- those of us what have worked with
assignments of that type -- experienced is, when we read the 30th student
assignment, with the same mistake, we lose our interest in explaining very fully
what we mean. We get irritated, you may not do, but I do. And we -- I in any case
-- have no patience any longer with the students. Now, this was something that we
found out already in the '40s, '30s and '40s. So at my place in Hermods, they
started at that time -- remember this was long before the computer and it's also
before I started -- started printing small sheets of paper where certain mistakes
that always cropped up were explained again and again and again. I can take
examples from language teaching. You know, there are certain things that always,
are always difficult. What I mentioned, writing, I have met him yesterday, instead
of I met him yesterday or I had done this if I'd known this yesterday I should have
done this, I would have done this if -- that's something that must be explained
again and again. And those of you who know French, let's take the order in which
you put the personal pronouns. Or in Germany, the cases and so on. Students
make the same mistake over and over again. Now, how do you settle this? Well,
you can do it the way that we did at Hermods those days, by the tutor simply

Theory of Distance Education Based on Empathy

Holmberg:
September 15, 2004
Page 5

writing, look at this sheet that is attached to your assignment. But today we can do
something much more elegant. In the letter, if we write a letter to the student after
an assignment, a personal letter, we simply include a comment on this mistake
that we are -- preprogrammed -- we can preprogram a very full explanation of, say
the conditional in German, or whatever it is, and we simply insert it in our letter,
easy enough with a computer. And it has been done also, there are studies about
this and on this occasion I have brought my book along with me so I can look up,
if you're interested, references to this empirical study of this, which proved to be
very, very successful.
Another thing that's absolutely basic to the personal approach to distance
education is that students are not made to wait. It's terrible if students have to wait
long, they simply lose interest and there is, again, a very solid statistical
examination made by the Norwegian Rekedal about this. And he can show, and he
has statistical evidence that the 0.001 level shows that if the student has to wait
for more than one week for comments on his or her assignments, they simply lose
interest. Not only do they lose interest, they are less successful. He has the most
terrific figures that you can easily look up. It was published in Distance Education
in Australia, in English, written originally in Norwegian. That is of course
extremely important.
Now, what does all this lead to? Well, it leads to empathy. And that is what I'm
after. We should not only feel for our students, we should show that we feel. We
should show that we are on a level with our students, that we, on the same level.
We happen to know more about this particular subject, but we are not centers of
wisdom, we are just people who happen to be specialists in a subject and we want
to help the students. We want to converse with them, we want to discuss with
them, we want to explain to them in a way that they really understand.
And that is really all there is to this approach. And now, I think it's up to you to
make your objections or put your questions. So I would prefer to stop here. I hope
I have expressed myself clearly enough. If not, I shall be happy to explain further.
Can we put it like that, so I invite questions. Yep?
Question:

about the importance, or the greater importance of tutors/student interaction

more than student/student interaction, could you comment on that?

Holmberg:

Sorry, [inaudible]

Question:

Yeah, the interaction between the student and tutor.

Holmberg:

Yes.

Theory of Distance Education Based on Empathy

Holmberg:
September 15, 2004
Page 6

Question:

Greater in importance than the student with another student. The fact that students
are more, are looking forward more to having interaction with the tutor than with
other students.

Holmberg:

This is an interesting question. Collaborative learning is, we generally believe,

very important. And to many, many students it evidently is. But strangely enough,
there are some studies that show that that is not the case. This fellow Rekedal
which I referred to, he made a paper which is reported on in the honorable
proceedings, where he asked the students, is it important to you that you have
contact with fellow students? And I think 98% said no, it's not important at all. I
just want contact with my tutor and I want to get on. It's very interesting. I don't
believe this covers the whole truth. I don't believe everybody would say so.
Nevertheless, it's interesting. We take collaborative study for granted. We usually
think that that is what students want. Maybe they do not want that. And then of
course, that causes us further to the question, is it the right thing to pace our
students, to keep them in classes? In most distance education, there are no classes
at all. The individual student works at his own pace, takes -- somebody can
complete the course in a year, that for others take four years, and so on, and they
go on on their own and are very successful. Now, this is the sorry -- some are very
successful, some are not at all successful. Some fail completely. What you must
remember, there are always two aspects to this. But this is something, in any case,
we should think of. And what I've just experienced, I looked at the data of the
Distance Education Training Council the other day, the vast majority, also in
America, are -- vast majority of distance education students work in this way, they
have printed material, they submit assignments when they want to, when they
have the opportunity to do so. And there are no classes at all. There are of course,
advantages to both systems. It's quite clear. Theres the support of the group and
I'm working, as I think Gene mentioned, with this degree program, masters
program distance education and have found the discussions we have in the online
seminars very valuable. Is it possible that there's distinction, not only between
students, between subjects? Is it possible that if you learn mathematics, or French,
it's different from learning a subject in which you have aspects to be discussed? I
ask the question. Is that the reply to your question? Other questions? Yep?.

Question:

Let me say that it's a pleasure to hear your presentation. I went back and looked at
my Doctoral Dissertation where I did most of my research from the 1980's and
found many quotes from you in it, and it was delightful to hear that your notions
about the pleasures of learning have continued to grow in the past 20 years. But
my question is this, it seems like much of the essence of what you're saying about
the pleasure of learning of the student has become part of the students motivation,
is related to a type of intellectual intimacy between the instructor and the student.
Well this is very challenging to achieve in an asynchronous fashion but it seems
like one of the easiest ways to have intellectual intimacy is with Socratic method,

Theory of Distance Education Based on Empathy

Holmberg:
September 15, 2004
Page 7

which is a lot of give and take between the students and the instructors. How can
we achieve this in an online setting?
Holmberg:

My spontaneous reaction would be to say, isn't it easier in an online setting than in

other contexts? You can discuss with the students. The students can make their
contributions, you can comment again and again. But what you said, I subscribe to
completely. The Socratic tradition and the importance of motivation and the fact
that the conversational approach makes for a conversation. When I think of my
own experience of online seminars and I've worked on them for a few years now, I
have a feeling, just a feeling, but a feeling, that it's quite easy to get into contact
with students. People say something, object to something, or make a contribution,
then I make my contribution, they come back and we exchange ideas. From my
point of view, this has been quite successful. But of course, it's the students who
have to say if it's successful. Mine is my personal feeling. Has somebody else
have an idea if there's a better to reply to this question? How do we bring about
this in an online setting? I'm afraid that'll have to be all of my reply. Yes?

Question:

[Inaudible]

Holmberg:

Perhaps this has something to do with the subject studied. I didnt say 98%, It was
Rekedal who, in his report, tells us this. His students are all engineering students.

Question:

[inaudible]

Holmberg:

Well, they are engineering students who are anxious to study for their own
careers. These students, in any case, said it's of no importance if there is no
relation with students, with other students. I would think, that people taking
courses in an educational subject, psychological subject, a subject that invites
discussions, would react differently. But on the other hand, I have personal, long
experience of highly careerist students who work to get their own degrees, to get
the highest possible marks, and to get through it as quickly as possible. And they
have certainly, I haven't asked them but I'm sure they're not interested in what
other students do, they're interested in getting through and getting through with
good results. Now, we may think what we want about this, but that's a very
substantial group of distance students, as I know them. But again, I want to stress,
I don't think all students are the same here and I'm the last person in the world to
reject collaborative study. I just say there are different aspects of this. Yep?

Question:

I was very interested in your comments about the conversational approach and the
experiments you've undertaken and your findings and observations, and
speculation that that might be something that might be better suited for the
American population. I've been playing with this idea myself and experimenting
in classrooms and have observed that we do not have a homogenous population in

Theory of Distance Education Based on Empathy

Holmberg:
September 15, 2004
Page 8

the United States of learners. Some portion in every class, some portion of
students are looking for a more formal, sort of exhortation on the part of the
faculty members, of faculty members lecturing. And others are really reach out
and welcome the conversational approach. So I'm curious, if you've done any sort
of adaptive -- developed any kind of adaptive model that really reaches out to both
populations of people, those who are looking for a more formal delivery, how do
you handle that?
Holmberg:

In my experience, distance education courses are usually of two kinds. Either you
produce a course with all the contents, you make a special course in a subject. Or
else, you write comments on literature, you write comments making students read
complicated literature and explain it to them. There is, of course, a sort of
adaptation to how you write. I am personally not at all afraid of this conversation
like presentation or subject matter in a course. But you simply cannot do it with
all the material there is to be learned. In an academic program students have to
read complicated literature, they have to read very -- you know, these solid books
that have been written by authorities in the field -- they have to get through them.
And what the distance education can do there is not to replace this literature, but
by helping students read them. And in this you can apply the conversational
approach, discussing with the students - the author says this, that, or the other
thing, why does he say that? Is there a reason for or against? You can discuss it,
helping your students read and it's not only this, but it's also helping your students
to see the whole context. So that the student doesn't simply concentrate on one
point, but sees how it all belongs together. And that is what we can do in -- there
are different names for it -- if you will look in the literature -- Commentary course
is what Looser calls it. There are study guides and so on. It doesn't matter what
you call them, but something that helps students to read. I think that is how I
would approach your question. Satisfactory? Yes?

Question:

It seems to me that you could characterize the empathy approach as being a sort of
implementation of the Socratic dialog. But it's also possible to look at the empathy
approach as being a method which reduces status differences between the faculty
and the students and I'm curious about that.

Holmberg:

Which reduces what?

Question:

The status

Holmberg:

Yes. Yes.

Question:

And how much of each of these do you think are occurring?

Holmberg:

Well actually, I'm very much for the egalitarian approach there. I don't see why an

Theory of Distance Education Based on Empathy

Holmberg:
September 15, 2004
Page 9

academic, because he's an academic, should consider himself to be superior to

other people. We are superior in our subjects, we know something that's students
don't know, generally, but they know something that we know nothing about. So
that is, for me, quite important. But then, of course, it is the Socratic approach, yes
it is, so it's old hat what I'm saying. I'm quite sure years ago that's how Socrates
has expressed his views. So really its yeah?
Question:

Where do you see distance educated headed?

Holmberg:

Well I can answer in many words and I can also very shortly say, I don't know.
But We need education for different reasons. We need the knowledge of the
culture that has been developed over the last centuries. We also need an
orientation in what happens now and what is to happen. So I'm afraid I must be
very, very vague in my reply. I don't think, really, I can be very specific. But one
thing that I want to underline is, we cannot forget what has been. We cannot
forget the development of the whole of Western culture, the whole of culture
generally. From the time of the Old Testament onwards. Because there was a
terrific development behind us, the question is where that leads. General
orientation is certainly necessary, at the same time as we must specialize. It isn't
much of a reply. But it's all I can do I'm afraid, when I stand here at the moment. If
I think it over, I might be able to do slightly better, but not much better, I don't
think so. Yes please.

Question:

Given that some faculty find this approach much more natural because it fits
with their personality, do you think that theres anyway to help faculty to be able
to show more empathy and use that approach? I mean, what kinds of training or
methods would you recommend?

Holmberg:

Not that I can answer much more productively here, but that is a question I more
or less anticipated. Some people simply are not empathetic in their approach. It's
certainly true. Some people are matter of fact and give you the facts and so on and
have no feeling for students. No, I'm sorry, its not, it's a tragical fact, but it is a
fact. And what we can do, is we can, of course try to help them, we can try to
show them what to do, but I have personally had a couple, not only a couple, a
few, rather unpleasant cases when we simply had to get rid of tutors who cannot
communicate with students, who simply don't feel with students. And I wish there
was some medicine we could take to help them. And if I -- This is a prejudice of
mine. It's sometimes those brilliant individual thinkers, I don't say all individual
thinker, Einstein was very empathetic, if you read what he writes. But some of
these thinkers deal with highly abstract matter. That is a very serious problem,
when we come across it. And haven't you all experienced that? That some people
simply are not ready to work with students in this way, helping them and so on.
Because Im afraid I have, and I've had to come to unpleasant conclusions in a

Theory of Distance Education Based on Empathy

Holmberg:
September 15, 2004
Page 10

couple of cases. Yep?

Question:

[inaudible]

Holmberg:

That was really the same question again. That how do we -- no! No, it's a question
of helping again, no it's helping tutors. Helping teaching staff to be empathetic.
And the only thing I can think of is, pointing out what the students need. Pointing
out what way they can help students. Pointing out the problems people have, so
that they realize what is self evident to them is not self evident to others, but there
are problems that students need help with. Again, I am fully aware that that
answer is highly unsatisfactory. But I have no better answer. Yep?

Question:

Do you know anybody who asks faculty members to take a class on how to be
empathetic?

Holmberg:

Well that is an idea. As they converse so intimately with students. Might be. It's
worth continuing that sort of thinking. Yes?

Question:

[inaudible] with your experience at running a center on research in distance

education, perhaps you would share with us what you think the state of research is
in the field.

Holmberg:

A lot of research is being done. We are examining all kinds of things in distance
education. We are examining target groups, students, how they succeed. We are
examining methods and so on. And I would say we are at quite an elementary
level, still. I imagine, personally, that the empathy approach is at the center of the
methodological development. I think that is the basis for developing methods. But
if I think of all of the research that is being done, we get a lot of facts. The latest
I've read was about the difference in approaches in East Asia from what we have
in the Western world. And I have a personal experience with that, I worked a little
in East Africa where it is not done to contradict a tutor. It simply is not done. You
are supposed to listen and learn from the authorities. My approach, I was in
Kenya, I was considered very, very revolutionary when I talked about opposing or
discussing or querying what's been said by the authorities, by those considered to
be authorities. Let's hope that something new will happen. That a new generation
of scholars will do something more. Now I'm -- personally -- I'm in the happy
situation of having worked with this for a very long time. I got into Hermods.
Hermods started in 1898. I began there in the middle of the '50s and became
President in '66 and that was an enormous organization for little Sweden, 100,000
students a year in a population, a total population of a country, at that time, less
than eight million people. And we had a great reputation and everything. And I
then from that I went to research at the FernUniversitaet. So I've seen some
development, but I think we're still at a modest level, that's all I can say.

Theory of Distance Education Based on Empathy

Holmberg:
September 15, 2004
Page 11

Shall I ask a question I heard, that they asked in the RAF in England during the
war, before the bombers started. The commander said, is everybody happy? That
was not a question whether their love life was in order or whether they were happy
in other ways, it simply meant, have you got your equipment, do you know what
things are? Can we get any further now? That's my question. It doesn't look like it.

END