Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 20

SPAEF

HISTORY AND ISSUES OF DISTANCE LEARNING


Author(s): EDWARD J. BANAS and W. FRANCES EMORY
Source: Public Administration Quarterly, Vol. 22, No. 3 (FALL, 1998), pp. 365-383
Published by: SPAEF
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40862326 .
Accessed: 16/06/2014 17:41
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

SPAEF is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Public Administration
Quarterly.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.245 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 17:41:54 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

FrontiersofEmpiricalResearchand Development

ROBERT T. GOLEMBIEWSKI,Editor

HISTORY AND ISSUES OF


DISTANCE LEARNING
EDWARD J. BANAS
W. FRANCES EMORY

Northern
Community
College,Woodbndge
Virginia
INTRODUCTION
In 1993, 1.3 million students took one of more distance learning
courses ... [a]nd the number ... is expected to soar to 11.6 millionstuabout
dentsby theyear2000 ... 1,218four-year
collegesand universities-

55% of the total-offereddistancelearningin 1996 ... In addition,nine


institutionscurrentlyofferdegree programsentirelyat a distance ...
New York Instituteof Technology,
These includeBoise State University,
Rochester Instituteof Technology,and the Universityof Maryland
(Goldberg,1998:4).

distance
ofas a contemporary
Although
learning
maybe thought
in education,
itsdomestic
origincan be tracedto the
phenomenon
ofcorrespondence
at Pennsylvania
StateUniverstudy
development
haveemerged,educational
sityin 1892.As delivery
technologies
haveintegrated
themintheexpanding
use and roleof
institutions
Whileonceconsidered
non-traditional
distancelearning.
education,
is mostcertainly
distancelearning
mainstream
and,with
becoming
thatnewstatus,a wholesetofissuescomeintoplayforall particiThisarticlereviewsthehistory
and develpantsandstakeholders.
ofdistance
distance
forpublicadministraopment
learning,
learning
and challenges
of distion,issuesofdistancelearning
participants,
tancelearning.
EVOLUTION

In thelate 1800s,access to highereducationin the U.S. was

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.245 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 17:41:54 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

FAQ FALL 1998

(366)

limitedby the geographicdistancebetweeneducationalinstitutions


and ruralpopulations.In an attemptto providelearner access to
remote populations,PennsylvaniaState Universityintroduceda
correspondence
program.
In 1892,Penn Statewas one of thefirstuniversities
to develop a program
of correspondencestudy.The programtook advantage of Rural Free
Delivery-THE 19th CENTURY'S VERSION OF THE INFORMATION HIGHWAY (emphasisadded)-to extendPenn State coursesand
agricultural knowledge to rural families ("History of Distance
Education,"1996)
"The old kindof distanceeducationgave studentsaccess to a university,"
notes Gary Miller,Associate Vice Presidentfor Distance Education at
State University,
whichlast yearhad about 19,000students
Pennsylvania
enrolledin some 250 distancecourses(Goldberg,1998:6).

The goal of providingeducationalopportunitiesto individuals


unableor unwilling
to participatein a traditional
full-time,
residency
remains
a
of
distance
program
primaryemphasis
learning.The
means of deliveryhave developed over the yearsfrombasic printbased correspondencecourses characterizedby time delays and
learnerisolationto Web-coursesthatreduce timedelays and may
reduce learnerisolation.Popularityof distancelearninghas been
influencedby the technicalcapacityto delivercourses,by changing
characteristics
of students,by legislativeand budgetaryconstraints,
and bydemandforincreasedaccess to highereducation.
The compositionof highereducation'sstudentbodyhas changed
dramaticallyand is one of the factorscontributingto increased
interestin distance learning.Only 4.5 millionof the 14.2 million
studentsare "traditional"
full-time
students,18 to 22 yearsold, and
residentsof campus or nearbyoff-campushousing(Allen, 1997).
From 1972 until1994, the percentageof college studentsover 25
yearsof age has risenfrom28% to 41% (Gubernickand Ebeling,
1997). Many studentsdesire both the timeand location flexibility
offeredbydistancelearning.
As state legislatorsand educational administratorsattemptto
increase access to highereducationand maintainor reduce costs,
distance learninghas become a strategicapproach to managing
publicresources.Distancelearningcan be a statelegislator'sdream
come trueby providingaccess to highereducationwithoutmanyof

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.245 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 17:41:54 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

FAQ FALL 1998

(367)

foritemssuch as dormitories,
the capital expenditures
classrooms,
commonareas,and libraryshelfspace associatedwith
offices,
faculty
can enhance an
traditionaldelivery.Cost-consciousadministrators
institution's
utilizationof resourcesby creativelyusing a varietyof
distancelearningdeliverytechnologies,rangingfromrelativelylow
to moreexpensivecuttingedge technology.
cost,print-based
delivery
can use a varietyofoffsitelocationsin publicschools
Institutions
and telecommunications
capabilitiesof businessesand government
agencies. For example, the Universityof Maine's Educational
locationsincluding
Networkserves9000 studentsin over 100 off-site
local publicschoolsand officesites (Gubernickand Ebeling,1997).
However,dependingon the distancelearningdeliverytechnique(s)
implemented,these capital intensiveprojects (i.e., classrooms,
withan equallyexpensiveteledormitories,
etc.) can be substituted
infrastructure.
communications
In additionto capitaloutlays,personnelcostsare a majorbudget
itemforschools.Faculty"productivity"
maybe increasedby increasin
the
number
of
students
classrooms
or in virtualclassing
multiple
roomsand personnelcostsmaybe decreasedbyusingadjunctfaculeducationalinstitutions
are usingpart-timeemployees
ty.For-profit
and distanceeducationdeliverytechniquesto challengethe traditionalmodel of not-for-profit
educationalinstitutions
and the traditionalface-to-face
model.
At theUniversity
of Phoenix,a for-profit
educationalinstitution,
the cost of providingone credithour of distanceeducationis $237
educationat the
comparedto $486 forone credithourof traditional
ArizonaStateUniversity.
This significant
costdifferennot-for-profit
to lowerlabor and benefitscostsforthe Univertialis due primarily
sityof Phoenix. The average annual facultysalary of $67,000 at
ArizonaState University
translatesintoa per credithourlabor cost
of $247 comparedto theUniversity
of Phoenixpeer credithourcost
of $46 (Gubernickand Ebeling,1997). In addition,the University
of
Phoenix'slower operatingcosts resultfromwhatis not done- not
residencehallsand dininghalls,notsupportbuildingor maintaining
ing low-enrollment
programssuch as geographyand physics,not
supporting
high-costprogramssuch as laboratorysciences,and not
research.
supporting
faculty
Institutions
all theircourse work through
offering
substantially
distance learningdeliverytechniques are neithernew nor rare.
Between1951and 1992,over22 open universities
providedaccess to
level courses to millionsof distancelearnersworldwide
university

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.245 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 17:41:54 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

FAQ FALL 1998

(368)

(Granger,1992). However,in the UnitedStates,onlinedegree


area rather
in thedistancelearning
recententry
environprograms
ment.Justas theproliferation
ofdesktopand laptopcomputers
in
thehomehaveenabledworkers
totelecommunicate,
individuals
with
accessto thistechnology
can nowbecometelecommunication
students.
liketheUniversity
ofTexas,PennState
Collegesanduniversities
GreenleafUniversity,
Waiden University,
University,
George
ofMaryland
Washington
University,
Strayer
College,theUniversity
ofTennessee,
andDukeUniversiUniversity
College,theUniversity
ty'sFuqua Schoolof Business,offera varietyof onlinecourses,
and graduatedegrees(Gibbs, 1998;
programs,undergraduate
Gubernick
andEbeling,1997;WaidenUniversity,
1997;"MBA'sfor
over190,000
students
wereenrolled
in25,700
MDs,"1998).Although
onlinecourses,fewerthanfivepercentof onlineprogramshave
theirfirst
student
graduated
(Gibbs,1989).Thiswillchangeas parhavesufficient
timeto completeonlinedegreerequireticipants
ments.
The academiceffectiveness
ofonlineprograms
is ofgreatinterest.Researchcomparing
thequality
ofdistance
andtraditional
learnindicates
that
there
no
are
difference
between
them.
ing
significant
measures
such
as
test
scores
and
that
Using
grades,findings
suggest
distanceprograms
are as effective
as traditional
on-campusproandEbeling,1997).Whenthedelivery
grams(Gubernick
technology
is appropriate
to coursecontent
and thereis equal studentaccess,
seemsto havelittleeffect
on studentachievedelivery
technology
ment.
Researchindicatesthattheinstructional
formatitself
video vs. videotapevs. "live"instructor)has littleeffect
(e.g., interactive
on studentachievementas longas the deliverytechnologyis appropriate
to the contentbeingofferedand all participants
have access to the same
(Trier,1996).
technology

instudent-to-student
therearedifferences
andstudent-toAlthough
the
effectiveness
of
distance
seemsto be
interaction,
faculty
learning
comparable.
LEARNING IN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

Distancelearningtechnologies
are beingused morein both

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.245 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 17:41:54 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

FAQ FALL 1998

(369)

public and privatetraining.The federal governmentperformsa


endeavorsin thousandsof offices
myriadof educationaland training
across the continentalUnited States, Hawaii, and its territories.
Differentcourse deliverytechniqueshave been applied by both inhouse educationand trainingpersonnelas well as out-sourcedto
These techniquesare being employedto maximizethe
contractors.
trainingand educationeffortthatwas an earlycasualtyof federal
government
budgetcutsand downsizing.
have been formedto addressthe concerns
Severalorganizations
The Government
of distanceeducationin the federalgovernment.
Education & TrainingNetwork(GETN, 1998) is an organization
linkingtheresourcesof 20 federalagenciesand their1000 downlink
and 14 uplinksites to produce over 7000 hours of programming
annually.The U.S. Distance LearningAssociation'sfederalgovernmentchapter(The Federal Government
DistanceLearningAssociathe
use
of
distance
learningin the federalgoverntion) promotes
ment. The GovernmentAlliance for Training and Education
(GATE), sponsored by the Office of Personnel Management's
Human Resources DevelopmentCouncil, also promotesdistance
learningin the federalgovernmentand has establisheda Federal
CenterforExcellencein DistanceLearning(FCEDL).
New trendsand productsthatchangethefabricof distancelearningand trainingemergecontinually.AsymetrixLearningSystems,
Inc. (1997) has developedsoftwareand applicationsforthe fivebillion dollara yeartraining
Course design,deliverymanageindustry.
mentsoftware,
and supportenable customersto develop Computer
Based Training(CBT) forOnlineLearning(OLL) usingan organization's Intranet,the Internetor CD-ROM. OLL is expected to
change the deliverymix of trainingfromthe 1997 blend of 26%
video and print,16% OLL, and 58% classroom trainingto 26%
video and print,37% OLL, and 37% classroomtrainingby the year
2000 (Asymetrix,
1997). OLL providesJITT (just in timetraining),a
of trainsystemthattrackscompletionand performance
monitoring
and
assessment
of
This
ing,
training.
asynchronous
learningreduces
relianceon ILT (instructorled training)and costs associated with
traditional
facilities.
training
An alternativeto out-sourcingthe trainingfunctionto private
contractors,
takingadvantageofvariousdistancelearninginfrastructuresand sharedresourcesof government
distancelearningassociais
with
tions, contracting
communitycolleges to provide specific
courses,programs(e.g., certificate)or training.NorthernVirginia

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.245 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 17:41:54 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

FAQ FALL 1998

(370)

Community
College(NVCC) providescourses(e.g.,Principlesof
to Department
ofStateemployees
at a Department
of
Accounting)
Statefacility
duringregularofficehours,designedand delivereda
certificate
foremployees
withtheDefenseLogistics
program
Agencollaborative
foremployees
of
cy,andestablished
computer
training
PrinceWilliamCounty
1998).
(BanasandEmory,
These courses,programs,
and training
are availablethrough
variousdelivery
traditional
and distance.By
technologies
including
ofthegovernment
distancelearning
the
consortia,
takingadvantage
sametraining
and education
couldbe accessedbyseveralagencies
orbyemployees
ofthesameagencyat variouslocations.
Asynchronouscoursedelivery
wouldaddresstheproblemof employeesin
different
timezonesandworkschedules.
DISTANCE LEARNING IN THE ARMY

Thetaskoftheeducation
command
oftheArmyis to ensurethat
soldiersand civilianemployeesare trainedand educatedin the
and concepts... thatwillwinwarsand
"cutting
edgeoftechnology
savelives"("Educating
oftheFuture,"
Officers
1998).The Army's
with
distance
is
similar
to
thatof the other
experience
learning
uniformed
services
andprovides
in
an exampleofdistancelearning
themilitary.
Distance learningis an instrumental
deliverymethodthathas been used
for
several
academia
and industry.
In recentyears,
successfully
yearsby
theArmytestedtheconceptthroughtheconductof severalpilotstudies.
was evaluatedthroughtask-performance
criteria,
Trainingeffectiveness
and
examinations,
post-course
follow-upjob-performance
surveys.The
resultsshowedthatinstruction
DL
means
can equal or
providedthrough
exceed the effectivenessof trainingdeliveredthroughtraditionalplatforminstruction.
Althoughit maynotbe appropriateforcertaintypesof
that
involved
training
physicalskills(e.g., airborne,aviation,and ranger
or
training) personal interaction(e.g., initialentrytraining).DL is an
effectivemethod for teachingcognitivecourses and course modules
(DodVolEd, 1998).

The Armyis experiencing


similarto those
budgetconstraints
in
education
and
is
to
do
morewithfewer
experienced higher
having
resources.The old Armytraining
modelof sendingpersonnelto
centralized
educational
facilities
(e.g.,Infantry
School)forextended

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.245 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 17:41:54 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

FAQ FALL 1998

(371)

periodsof timeputspersonnelin locationsthatmake the rapid decharacteristic


of today'smilitary
actiondifficult.
The Army
ployment
is overhaulingits educationaldeliverysystemof over 1000 courses
and programsto includea significant
portionof distance learning
deliverytechniques.To thisend,theArmyis planningthe constructionof 745 classroomsin 204 locationsand the installationof hardware and softwareto facilitatethe distanceeducationforpersonnel
withina 50 mileradiusof thefacility
(Distance LearningHardware,
1998).
DISTANCE LEARNING IN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Distancelearningis changingtheeducationalenvironment.
Since
thereare nowfewertraditional
studentstakingclasses in a traditional format,the educational environmenthas changed significantly
to at least investigate
the opporenoughforeducationalinstitutions
tunitiesof distancelearning.Public Administration
education is a
and mustadapt to thischangeor run
componentofthisenvironment
ratherthan proactively.
the riskof tryingto respondretroactively
The outdatedviewofPublicAdministration
educationas a discipline
deliveredin classroomsby universitiesto M.P.A. candidates is as
uselessas teachingM.B. studentto use an abacus.
New playershave enteredthe marketplace.Public,private,and
educationalinstitutions
vie forthewarmbodies and tuition
for-profit
If Duke University'sFuqua
dollars of the consumers/students.
BusinessSchool can chargea premiumforitsOnlineGlobal M.B.A.
OnlineGlobal M.B A.
program,howfarawayis theDuke University
of Phoenixcan deliveran onlinecourse at
program?The University
and can accommo50% per credithourless thanthe "competition"
date a working,
and some
singleparent'sschedulewithasynchronous
courses.
synchronous
are not the onlyfactorsto be
Cost, convenience,and flexibility
consideredin selectingor designingan academic program.Quality
of distancelearningis a significant
issue forall stakeholders.When
comparedto traditional
delivery,
researchpublished since 1920 has indicatedthatcorrespondence/distance studystudentsperformjust as well as, and in most cases better
than,theirclassroomcounterparts
(see DETC (1997) publication,"The
Effectiveness
of theHome StudyMethods").

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.245 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 17:41:54 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

FAQ FALL 1998

(372)

ThomasRussell(1996)coinedthephrase"nosignificant
differencephenomenon"
to reflect
research
findings
datingbackto 1928.
Studiesconclusively
indicate
thatdistance
isjustas effective
learning
as traditional,
face-to-face
whenmeasuredbyachievement
learning
and cost-effectiveattitudes,
(testscores),grades,job performance,
ness(DubinandTavaggia,1968;Jonesetal, 1992;Reid and MacandAnderson,
Lennan,1967;Schlosser
1994).
distancelearningmayenhancethe educational
Additionally,
At Pennsylvania
StateUniversity,
a Politics
experience.
Harrisburg,
ofLegislation
coursewasdeveloped
usingan interactive
compressed
videosystemconnectedto sitesbyconventional
telephonelines.
Studentsin theclassroomare able to interact
with
synchronously
in a studioin thestate'sFinanceBuilding.
statelegislators
Legislatorscan discusscurrent
issuesand initiatives
withthe
legislative
andansweranyquestions
students
as iftheywereinthesameroom
as thestudents
(Rounds,1998).
ISSUES OF DISTANCE LEARNING

Whilethereis growing
of and attention
to distance
recognition
in
in
its
inclusion
academia
education,
learning higher
growing
sigand experience.
nificantly
changesthe educationalenvironment
Thesechangesand differences
needto be acknowledged
and discussedbyall stakeholders.
Ofprimary
is
the
importance recognition
thatdistancelearningand teachingis different
fromtraditional
classroomdelivery
forall partiesinvolved
and also thatthesocial
context
andinteraction
ofall participants
are inherently
different.
Thisis nottosaythattheyarebetter
orworsebuttheyare different.
Justas theyare different,
distancelearning
is notforeveryone
and
notall delivery
are
for
all
courses.
Thus,
technologies appropriate
"one size doesnotfitall.
Fromthisposition,
thefourcategories
ofadministrative,
faculty,
and instructional
issuesare identified.
The issueswithin
student,
thesecategories
arenotmutually
exclusive
butoverlapandcomminwith
each
other
so
it
becomes
difficult
to discussthemin isolagle
tion.However,fororganizational
purposes,thesecategoriesare
usedas a convenience.
Administrative
Issues
Administrative
issuestendtobe focusedat theinstitutional
level

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.245 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 17:41:54 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

FAQ FALL 1998

(373)

and involveboth internaland externalplayers.Administrators


may
no longerviewdistancelearningas a separateentityin the academic
to be used to extendprogramsto new audiencesbut may
community
viewit as an integralpartof meetingeducationalchallengesin our
distancelearning,
By mainstreaming
dynamic,diverseenvironment.
mustintegratedistancelearninginto existingpolicy
administrators
and missions.
frameworks
Increasingly,highereducation administratorsare recognizingthatthe
emergenceof distancelearningwithintraditionalhighereducation rein the policultureand, specifically,
quires a changein the institutional
cies by whichinstitutionsdefine and ensure quality ("Innovations in
Distance Education,"1996).

Institutionsmust review currentpolicies to identifythose that


presentbarriers to distance learning and those that need to be
requirementsof disdevelopedto accommodatethe infrastructure
issues include:fee assessment,out-oftance learning.Infrastructure
stateversusin-statefees, and access to technologyby facultyand
students("Innovationsin Distance Education,"1996). Policy developmentincludeseducationalgoals of distancelearning,incentives
to participatein distancelearning,facultyaccess to
and disincentives
strucof distancelearning,institutional
administration
technology,
and
assessment
turefordistancelearning,cost distribution
models,
ofintra-/inter-institutional
sharing(Ibid.).
to resolvenumerouspolicy
Distancelearningrequiresinstitution
issues such as the allocation of resources, rules and regulatory
procedures,reportingand accountabilitystandards,and organizationalstructures.Decisions fromthe microlevel such as class size
and schedulingof resourcesto macroissuesof fundingand fees will
influencethesuccessand growthof distancelearning.
substantially
Administrative
rules and regulatoryproceduresmustintegrate
distancelearninginto the mainstream.For example, institutional
have recognizedfacultyworkload
rewardsystemsthattraditionally
as classroomtimeand committeeworkmayneed to be redefinedto
acknowledge online hours and course development.Academic
recognitionof distance courses,residence requirements,and fee
structuresmustbe reviewed.Linked to these issues are those of
and specificprogramaccreditation.
generalacademicaccreditation
to
the
state
and
boardsis a criticalissue
Accountability
governing
Not onlyare institutions
foradministrators.
beingasked to do more

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.245 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 17:41:54 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

FAQ FALL 1998

(374)

or improving
withless butthismustoccurwhilemaintaining
quality.
and programadvisoryboards,establishinga
The use of institutional
chiefacademic officlear reportingrelationshipto the institution's
in distance
and involvement
cer, assessmentof facultyparticipation
learning,and recognitionof the difficultiesof inter-institutional
standards.
assessmentofqualityaffectaccountability
FacultyIssues
Facultyinvolvedin distancelearningshare a myriadof concerns
abouttheimpactof distancelearningon theircontrolof courses,the
degree of institutional
supportfordistancelearning,the effectsof
tenureand promodistancelearningon facultyrewards,incentives,
withstudents.
tion,and thechanginginteraction
Even themostconfidentfacultyare nervouswhenapproachedto teacha
courseat a distance("DistanceEducationPrimer,"1998).

Institutionsthatare encouragingfacultyto become involvedin


distancelearningmustprovidea comprehensive
supportsystemfor
from
a
classroom to disto
make
the
transition
traditional
faculty
forprofessional
tance learning.Facultymusthave the opportunity
onsite
training,workshops,conferences,
developmentincluding
and sources.To educateand acclimatepeople to distance
mentoring,
(CMI), the
learningand especiallycomputermediatedinstruction
offers
an online
of
Los
Extension
University California,
Angeles
in
certificate
online
teaching(UCLA Extension,
post-baccalaureate
1997). However,a tensionarises betweenthe demand forfaculty
membersto remaincurrentwithintheiracademic discipline and
committimeto developingtheirskillsas distanceeducators.
In manyinstances,highereducationfaculty
havelittleor no trainin
and
on
the
instructional
must
rely
ing
design
supportof instructionaltechnologistsin designingan effectivedistance course. It is
distancecoursesare nottheconversionof a
quiteclearthateffective
traditionalcourse by some technologybut involvethe redesignof
whichshouldnotbe the
based on an appropriatetechnology
delivery
factor
but
the
content
and
desired
determining
experiencesshould
drivethe selectionand implementation
of technology(Clark, 1983;
"Distance LearningPrimer,"1998). Afterthe course has been designed,the developmentand productionof educational support
materialsmustbe providedby specialistsand supportpersonnel.In

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.245 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 17:41:54 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

FAQ FALL 1998

(375)

of courselogisticssuchas materialsdelivaddition,themanagement
etc.,mustbe providedby the
ery,off-site
supportstaff,registration,
institution.
The developmentand deliveryof a distance course is a team
effortutilizingfaculty,instructionaltechnologists,administrative
and productionstaff.This "team"approachmayleave a
supportstaff,
facultymemberfeeling"outof control"and vulnerableto the time
and attentionof supportstaff.Anothertension may occur when
thereis disagreement
betweenthe facultymember(contentspecialand
the
instructional
ist)
technologist
(designspecialist)in the best
to
deliver
course
or
content
course requirements.
How
way
specific
thisis resolvedmaybe dependenton the administrators
responsible
fordistancelearningat theinstitution.
Concernsabout facultyincentives,rewards,evaluation,tenure,
and promotionneed to be clearlyidentified,discussed, and addressedbytheinstitution.
Distancelearningtakesmoretimeforthe
in
both
the
faculty
developmentand deliveryof courses.Institutions
need to acknowledgethatthe course designand deliveryare separatetasksthatneed to be encouragedand supported.Whetherfacultyare givenrelease time,sabbatical, pay incentives,or graduate
assistantsto encouragethe developmentof distancecourses,institutionsmustprovideincentives
and encouragement
forfaculty.
In conjunctionwithinstitutional
support,facultymustaccept a
certain degree of personal responsibilityin developing distance
shouldrecognizecreativity,
scholarlearningcapabilities.Institutions
in
and
effective
distance
ship,
teaching
learningas part of faculty
performancereviews,tenure portfolios,and promotion tracks.
Distance facultyare dependent on instructionaland technology
of deliverytechnology,
and on studentcapabiliteams,on reliability
ties.
One of the difficulties
associatedwithmeasuringteachingeffectivenessis the impactof the deliverytechnology.When students
experiencedifficulty
using the technology,i.e., breakdown,poor
attribute
it to thefacultymember.
qualitytransmission,
theytypically
it
is
incumbent
the
institution
to
Thus,
upon
developcourse evaluationinstruments
thatdistinguish
thefaculty
fromthetechnology.
Evaluationof distanceeducationforpromotionand tenureis problematic, because teachingat a distance is oftendependent on instructional
supportteams ratherthanon the instructor'sindividualperformance.
Confirmingevidence of the quality of distance education ordinarily

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.245 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 17:41:54 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

FAQ FALL 1998

(376)

would be bypeer reviewbut peers maynot be familiarwiththe requirementsof distanceeducationdesignand development.


thedeliverymediumofteninfluencesthe evaluaRightlyor wrongly,
For example,thequalityof interactionof a distanceeducationoffering.
tive compressedvideo used in a distance education course will affect

studentand other facultyperceptions of the quality of the distance


educationcourseitself("Innovationsin Distance Education,"1996).

issue is intellectualproperty
Another faculty/administrative
have
While
rightsto theirown research,
faculty
may
property
rights.
the propertyrightsto course design and materialsis less clearly
the shared
need policiesthatexplicitly
defined.Institutions
identify
and
natureof intellectual
encouragefaculty
property simultaneously
include("Innovationin Distance EducaAlternatives
participation.
tion,"1996):
While significantinstitutionalresourcesare involved,intellectual
propertyrightsfor the developmentof electronic teaching materials
should be shared by the faculty(and possible membersof the instructional design team) and the institutionin relationshipto resources

expended.
Ownershipof intellectualpropertyshould be determinedby the
purpose forwhichthe materialsare intended.Instructionalmaterials
produced specificallyfor a course are owned by the institutionand
sharedwithindividualfaculty,
royaltynegotiationsshould be includedin
anyintellectualpropertyagreement.

Sharingpotentialrevenues,existingrules concerningintellectual
property
rights,and the inclusionof technicalsupportstaffin copyand
rightsissuesmustbe addressedbythe
property
right intellectual
institution.
StudentIssues
whatthey
Distancelearnersneed to understand
clearly"upfront"
As
are enteringintoincludingcourse and technology
requirements.
forall participants
statedpreviously,distancelearningis different
for students.Gibson (1996) indicates that
and most importantly
distancelearnersneed to be more focused,need to manage time
need to be able to work both independentlyand in
effectively,

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.245 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 17:41:54 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

FAQ FALL 1998

(377)

be self-disciplined
and assertive.
groups,have strongself-motivation,
A self-evaluation
in a distance
instrument,
givenpriorto registration
course,mayhelp studentsdeterminewhetheror not distancelearningis appropriateforthem.
Distance learnersneed easy access to a varietyof institutional
and courseinformation.
Learnersneed a clear understanding
of fee
information
structure,
policiesfordistancestudents,administrative
and support
admissions,advising,registration,
textbooks,
concerning
should include a prepersonnelcontactlines. Course information
class description
of technology
to be utilized,coursepolicies,and an
expanded syllabusdetailingall assignmentsand requirements.As
statedin "DistanceEducationPrimer",1998:
[SJtudentsin distance education programsare rarelygiven such an
opportunity.
Theysimplyappear on the firstday of class, receivetechnical overviewand a fewhandouts,and beginclass. The studentsbeginthe
course at a disadvantagedue to the lack of informationtheyreceive,
unliketraditional
on-campusstudents.

Studentisolationis a majorconcernin distancelearning.While a


certainamountof isolationis unavoidable,coursescan be designed
to encourage or require synchronous/asynchronous
student-tostudentinteractionto enhance the learningexperience.However,
thisusuallymeans significanttime commitmentby facultyin the
monitoringand guidingof these interactions.For some courses, a
mixed model requiringsome traditionalclassroom time may be
advantageous.
For some students,the personal flexibility
of distancelearning
means 24 hours-a-day,seven days-a-weekaccess to facultyand
whenthereis a delay
supportstaff.These studentsmaybe frustrated
inresponding
totheirinquiriesorfeedbackontheirassignments.
When
studentsencountertechnicalor institutional
there
problems,
maybe
confusionabout the appropriatecontactpersonnel.For example,a
studentmaycontactthefaculty
memberabouta registration
problem
thatis theresponsibility
oftheRegistrar's
Officeora technology
breakdownmayresultin studentand facultyinteraction
being delayedor
evenlost.
Whenworkingwithtechnology,
it is notthecuttingedge capacity
thatlimitsaccess,it is the lowestcapacitythatbecomes the limiting
factor.Technologyis onlyas good as or as accessibleas the lowest
standardavailable to students.Studentsmusthave requisiteskills

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.245 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 17:41:54 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

PAQ FALL 1998

(378)

demandedbythedeliverytechnology.
This is nota matterof having
equipment but being able to use the technology;thus, delivery
mustaddressthe targetmarket'sreceivingcapability.In
technology
additionto technology
skills,distancelearnersneed an understanding of "distanceetiquette"and style.For example, studentsat a
remotesite mayinappropriately
a speakerduringa video
interrupt
conferenceor maydisengageas thoughtheyare watchingtelevision.
While course designmayhelp these conditions,studentsmusttake
foractivelyengagingwiththedelivery
format.
responsibility
The social environmentforfacultyand studentsis changed in
distancelearning.In a traditional
classroom,studentsmaybe forced
to engageideas,beliefs,and stylesdifferent
fromtheirown bybeing
courteous and respectful.While some degree of anonymitymay
to minimizebiases or preconceived
providestudentstheopportunity
ideas, isolationmayallow studentsto ignoreor simplynot respond
to ideas inconsistent
withtheirown,resultingin a less robustlearnfor
all
ing experience
participantsand may negativelyaffectthe
desiredoutcomesofa course.
The social contextforstudent-faculty
is affectedby
relationships
distancedelivery.
Whilebothmaysend e-mailmessages,leave voice
theremaybe little
mail,and processa varietyofwritten
assignments,
or no face-to-face
interaction.
The lack of connectioninfluencesthe
learningprocess by makingit more detached, less personal, and
moreformal.As old as it is and as popularas distancelearninghas
become, it stillhas its critics.The lack of face-to-facecontactbetweenstudentsor studentsand facultyworriessome educatorsthat
distancelearningwillproducepoorlysocializedstudentslackingthe
tact,social skills,and notionsof correctbehavior.Deliverymethods
fordistancelearningcan exacerbatethe negativeaspects of traditional course delivery.Video-tapinga poor classroom lectureand
deliveringit via cable televisionas a tele-courseonlyenlarges the
audience receivinga non-interactive,
passivestudentscenario,talkhead
education
ing
(Goldberg,1998). Whathas passed as education
butwas at leastconfinedto a classroomis now made availableto the
massesundertheguiseofdistancelearning.
Instructional
Issues
Since academicpreparationof teachingfacultyhas been in their
disciplineratherthaneducationalmethodology,
theymayhave little
of
instructional
or
understanding
design technology.Facultyneed

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.245 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 17:41:54 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

FAQ FALL 1998

(379)

the support of instructionaltechnologists("Distance Education


Primer,"1998):
The time has come to spend more time on the design of instruction,
includingappropriate technologyselection for deliveryand a clear
of theaudienceto be served.
understanding

Instructional
of facultyand
designissuesincludetherelationship
instructional
instructional
and selection
model,
technologists,
design
of deliverytechnology.
These issuesmustbe confronted
earlyin the
and ineffito
avoid
both
conflicts
developmentprocess
personnel
ciencies of certain deliverytechnologies.While there may be a
tendencyto use cuttingedge technologyin course delivery,these
or efficient.
technologiesmaynotbe themosteffective
Essentialto successfuldistancelearningis a collaborativerelawho are thecontentspecialistsand instructionshipbetweenfaculty
tionaltechnologists.
Higher education facultyin the US and elsewhere rarelytake classes
Their
duringgraduateschool thatteach themhow to designinstruction.
focushas and willcontinueto be on the contenttheyteachand research
thatsupportsit ("DistanceEducationPrimer,"1998).

As mentionedearlier,a team or collaborativeapproach to course


to facultywho perceivea loss of course
designmaybe threatening
controland potentialinfluenceof theirtenureand promotiongoals.
Justas facultymustsupportcollaborativerelationships,
instructional
must
be
sensitive
to
and
limitations
and
designers
facultyneeds
remainflexiblein the designof distancecourses.While thereare a
varietyof designmodels,most are groundedin the principlethat
of the learnerare essentialin
learningoutcomesand characteristics
effectivecourse design.Once these componentshave been identified,organizational,delivery,and managementstrategiescan be
developed.Afterthecoursehas been producedand delivered,evaluationsshouldidentify
neededmodifications.
While everyelementof course designis important,one of the
mostcriticaland sometimesdauntingtasksis the selectionof deliverytechnologies.Few distancecoursesrelyon one deliverytechnoluse voice mail, e-mail,and
ogy.Even print-basedcoursestypically
facsimilesto deliver instruction.Factors that influencedelivery
technologyinclude: desired learningoutcomes, deliveryoptions

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.245 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 17:41:54 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

PAQ FALL 1998

(380)

or asynchronous
based on content,synchronous
delivery,and costs.
The selectionof deliverytechnologiesis a complexbalancing and
blendingof thesefactorsand one mustkeep in mindthatthereis no
one rightbutmanywaysof delivery.
Blendingtechnologiesis beneficial by providinggreaterstudentaccess and appealing to multiple
learningstyles.
Regardless of the deliverytechnology,providingstudent-tostudentinteraction
seems to improvethe learningand the learning
experienceforstudents(McHenry and Bozik, 1995; Clark 1983).
Thus, it is criticalthatcourse designincludessome formsof manand
aged interaction
ensuringthateach studenthas the opportunity
to interactwithothers.Interaction
responsibility
maybe as simpleas
discussiongroupsand forumsor as involvedas collaborativewriting
assignments.Whateverthe means, it is importantto include this
interaction.
Technologycostsmaybe of concernto boththe deliveringinstitutionand the receiverof distancecourses and manytechnologies
maybe prohibitively
expensive.Good instructional
designwill base
theselectionof delivery
on
technology content,targetmarketcapaciand
outcomes.
ty,
learning
[SJuccessful
programsof thefuturewillfocuson theseareas and willstay
offthe high-endtechnologybandwagon-unless it is an appropriateway
to deliver that part of the instruction("Distance Education Primer,"
1998).

Whiletechnology
itsuse mustbe groundedin effecmaybe exciting,
tivenessand efficiency.
With the wide varietyof deliveryoptions
available, the costs of makingweak decisions may be devastating
(Wagner,1990). It is the authors'beliefthatthe perceivedminimal
deliverycostsofweb coursesis one of thedrivingforcesin its popularityfordistancelearningdelivery.

CONCLUSION
As distance learningcontinuesto grow in scale and delivery
capacity,thereare manyissues and challengesthatface students,
Some of themajorissuesfacingthese
educators,and administrators.
have
been
identified
participants
previously.How institutionsand
the
demands
fordesigning,implementing,
and
legislatorsapproach
a
infrastructure
for
will
distance
maintaining supportive
learning

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.245 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 17:41:54 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

PAQ FALL 1998

(381)

resources
andnew,collaborative
institutional
requirebothfinancial
Costsofduplicatetechnological
relationships.
capacitycannotbe
sustained
andindividual
institutions.
bystategovernments
willbe a
Identification
ofcourseand degreeappropriateness
in thehighereducation
discussion
forall stakeholders
continuing
vs.asynchronous
community.
Quality,
synchronous
delivery,
program
and
on
and
ofthe
outcomes,
goals
impact learning, competitiveness
in
educational
market
arejusta fewoftheissuesto be considered
theprocessof determining
whether
or notdistancelearningis a
viablemodeofdelivery.
willconStudent
and awareness
access,success,learning
styles,
tinue.Is therea negative
ofdistance
for
students
who
effect
learning
Will
the
do nothaveaccessto delivery
this
exacerbate
technology?
between
the
educational
levels
of
different
economic
groups?
gap
indistance
Arethereanygender,
raceoreconomic
biasesembedded
of
How maydistance
learning?
learning
changethesocialstructure
educationandthusthesocialskillsoflearners,
teachers,
workers,
andcitizens?
All oftheseissuesdemandattention
stakebydistancelearning
stancethat
holders.We mustestablisha thoughtful,
collaborative
informed
promotes
decision-making.

REFERENCES
WASHINGTON POST MAGAAllen, Charlotte(1997). "The VirtualUniversity."
ZINE (August10):16-34.
Asymetrix
LearningSystems,Inc. (1997). THE ASYMETRIX GUIDE TO INTER-

ACTIVE ONLINE LEARNING. Bellevue,WA: Author.


Banas, EdwardJ. and W. FrancesEmory(1998). "The Role of CommunityColEducation."JOURNAL OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS
leges in Public Administration
EDUCATION 4(3):221-226.
Researchon LearningfromMedia." REVIEW OF
Clark,R. (1983). "Reconsidering

EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH 53(4):445-459.


Distance EducationAdvisoryCommittee(1996). "DistanceEducationat Penn State:
Vision, Principles, and Policies: A Discussion Paper." www.outreach.psu.
edu/de/programmatic_vision.html.
"DistanceEducationPrimer"(1998). www.utexas.edu/cc/cit/de/deprimer/htlm/
"Distance Learning Hardware, Facilities, and Communications Infrastructure"
(1998). http//www-dest.monroe.army.
mil/adlp/dist...
ing/master/chapters/
cht.html#anchor525016.
DodVolEd (1997). "Voluntary Education Programs for Military Personnel."

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.245 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 17:41:54 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

PAQ FALL 1998

(382)

http://voled.doded.mi1/doddocs/dodl322.8.htm.
Paradox:A Comparative
Dubin, R. and T. Tavaggia(1968). 'The Teaching-Learning
Center
Analysisof College TeachingMethods,"Eugene, OR: Oregon University,
forAdvancedStudyof EducationalAdministration.
(ERIC Document ReproductionServiceED 026 988).
mil-ed/opening,
"EducatingOfficersof the Future: (1998). http://www.dtic.mil/

html.
Federal CenterforExcellencein Distance Learning(1996). "A Proposal fromthe
Government
AllianceforTrainingand Education."www.fgdla.org/center_e.htm.
Gibbs, Hope Satz (1998). "Can Distance LearningGo the Distance?" FASTFORWARD, WASHINGTON POST (January30):36-37.
of Self-Conceptin Distance EducaGibson,C.C. (1996). 'Toward an Understanding
tion."AMERICAN JOURNAL OF DISTANCE EDUCATION 10(l):23-26.
Goldberg,Debbie (1998). "Learningfroma Distance." EDUCATION REVIEW.
WASHINGTON POST (April5)4-7.
Government Education and Training Network (GETN)

(1998). www.fgdla.

org/getn2.htm.
Granger, D. (1990). "Open Universities: Closing the Distance to Learning."
CHANGE: THE MAGAZINE OF HIGHER EDUCATION 22(4):42-50.
Gubernick,Lisa and Ashlea Ebeling (1997). "I Got My Degree Through E-Mail."
FORBES (June16). www.forbes.com/forbes/97/0616/59120841.htm.
"Historyof DistanceEducation"(1996). www.outreach.psu.edu/de/history.html.
"Innovationsin Distance Education"(1996). "The Reportof Two PolicySymposia,
www.outreach.psu.edu/de/policy/policy.html.
Jones,J.I.,M. Simonson,M. Kemis,and C. Sorenson(1992). DISTANCE EDUCAof Scienceand Technology.
TION: A COST ANALYSIS, Iowa State University
"MBA' forMD's" (1998). ODD JOBS, WASHINGTON POST (March 15):H4.
at a Distance:A Studyof InterMcHenry,L. and M. Bozik (1995). "Communicating
actionin a Distance EducationClassroom,"COMMUNICATION EDUCATION
44:362-370.
Penn State Continuingand Distance Education (1996). "Innovationsin Distance
Education: The Report of Two Policy Symposia." www.outreach.psu.

edu/de/ide/policy/policy.html.
Reid, J. and D. MacLennan (1967). RESEARCH IN INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION AND FILM: SUMMARIES OF STUDIES. Washington,D.C.: Officeof
Education,U.S. Departmentof health,Educationand Welfare.
Rounds, Jon (1998). "InteractiveTV Puts Legislators in Penn State Harrisburg
Classroom."CATALYST. www.outreach.psu.edu/tatalyst/Voll6Nol/tv.html.
Russell,Thomas L. (1996). "The 'No SignificantDifferencePhenomenon'."http:/
/tenb.mta.ca/phenom/phenom.html.
Schlosser,CA. and M.L. Anderson(1994). DISTANCE EDUCATION

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.245 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 17:41:54 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

REVIEW

PAQ FALL 1998

(383)

OF THE LITERATURE. Iowa State University,


ResearchInstituteforStudiesin
Education.
Trier,Vicki (ed.) (1996). "Distance Education at a Glance: Guide #10: Distance
EducationResearch."http://www.uidaho.edu/evo/distlO.html.

UCLA Extension(1997). THE CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION IN ONLINE


TEACHING, online@unex.ucls.edu.
Wagner,E. (1990). "Lookingat Distance Education throughan EducationalTechnologist'sEyes.JOURNAL OF DISTANCE EDUCATION 4(l):53-68.
Waiden University
(1997). PH.D IN APPLIED MANAGEMENT AND DECISION
SCIENCES. Minneapolis:Author.

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.245 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 17:41:54 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Вам также может понравиться