Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
.
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
FrontiersofEmpiricalResearchand Development
ROBERT T. GOLEMBIEWSKI,Editor
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-
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
(366)
(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
(368)
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
(369)
(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).
(371)
(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
(373)
(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).
(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
(376)
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,
(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.
(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
(379)
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).
(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
(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-
(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
REVIEW
(383)