Distance Learning
and University
Effectiveness:
Changing Educational
Paradigms for
Online Learning
Caroline Howard
Techknowledge-E Systems, USA
Karen Schenk
K. D. Schenk and Associates, USA
Richard Discenza
University of Colorado at Colorado Springs, USA
Information Science Publishing
Hershey • London • Melbourne • Singapore
Acquisition Editor:
Senior Managing Editor:
Managing Editor:
Development Editor:
Copy Editor:
Typesetter:
Cover Design:
Printed at:
Mehdi Khosrow-Pour
Jan Travers
Amanda Appicello
Michele Rossi
Bernard J. Kieklak
Jennifer Wetzel
Michelle Waters
Integrated Book Technology
Published in the United States of America by
Information Science Publishing (an imprint of Idea Group Inc.)
701 E. Chocolate Avenue, Suite 200
Hershey PA 17033
Tel: 717-533-8845
Fax: 717-533-8661
E-mail: cust@idea-group.com
Web site: http://www.idea-group.com
and in the United Kingdom by
Information Science Publishing (an imprint of Idea Group Inc.)
3 Henrietta Street
Covent Garden
London WC2E 8LU
Tel: 44 20 7240 0856
Fax: 44 20 7379 3313
Web site: http://www.eurospan.co.uk
Copyright © 2004 by Idea Group Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be
reproduced in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, without written permission from the publisher.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Distance learning and university effectiveness : changing education
paradigms for online learning / Caroline Howard, Karen Schenk, Richard
Discenza, editor[s].
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 1-59140-178-X (hardcover) -- ISBN 1-59140-179-8 (ebook) -- ISBN
1-59140-221-2 (pbk.)
1. Distance education--Computer-assisted instruction. 2. Education,
Higher--Computer-assisted instruction. 3. Education, Higher--Effect of
technological innovations on. I. Howard, Caroline, 1953- II. Schenk,
Karen, 1955- . III. Discenza, Richard.
LC5803.C65D56 2003
378.1'758--dc22
2003014956
British Cataloguing in Publication Data
A Cataloguing in Publication record for this book is available from the British Library.
All work contributed to this book is new, previously-unpublished material. The views
expressed in this book are those of the authors, but not necessarily of the publisher.
Distance Learning and
University Effectiveness:
Changing Education
Paradigms for
Online Learning
Table of Contents
Preface ............................................................................................................. vi
Caroline Howard, Techknowledge-E Systems, USA
Karen Schenk, K. D. Schenk and Associates Consulting, USA
Richard Discenza, University of Colorado at Colorado Springs, USA
Section I: Strategies and Paradigms
Chapter I. How Distance Programs will Affect Students, Courses,
Faculty and Institutional Futures ................................................................. 1
Murray Turoff, New Jersey Institute of Technology, USA
Richard Discenza, University of Colorado at Colorado Springs, USA
Caroline Howard, Techknowledge-E Systems, USA
Chapter II. Design Levels for Distance and Online Learning ............. 21
Judith V. Boettcher, Designing for Learning, USA
Chapter III. E-Moderating in Higher Education ................................... 55
Gilly Salmon, Open University Business School, United Kingdom
Chapter IV. Community-Based Distributed Learning in a Globalized
World .............................................................................................................. 79
Elizabeth Wellburn, Royal Roads University, Canada
Gregory Claeys, Aboriginal Development Consultants, Canada
Section II: Course Development Instruction and Quality Issues
Chapter V. Online Course Design Principles ......................................... 99
Lance J. Richards, Texas A&M University, USA
Kim E. Dooley, Texas A&M University, USA
James R. Lindner, Texas A&M University, USA
Chapter VI. Theory and Practice for Distance Education: A Heuristic
Model for the Virtual Classroom ............................................................ 119
Charles E. Beck, University of Colorado at Colorado Springs, USA
Gary R. Schornack, University of Colorado at Denver, USA
Chapter VII. Looking for Indicators of Success for Distance
Education .................................................................................................... 144
Wm. Benjamin Martz, Jr., University of Colorado at Colorado
Springs, USA
Venkateshwar K. Reddy, University of Colorado at Colorado
Springs, USA
Karen Sangermano, University of Colorado at Colorado Springs,
USA
Chapter VIII. Online Assessment in Higher Education: Strategies to
Systematically Evaluate Student Learning ............................................ 163
Elizabeth A. Buchanan, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, USA
Chapter IX. Assessing the Impact of Internet Testing: Lower Perceived
Performance ............................................................................................... 177
Wm. Benjamin Martz, Jr., University of Colorado at Colorado
Springs, USA
Morgan M. Shepherd, University of Colorado at Colorado Springs,
USA
Chapter X. Modular Web-Based Teaching and Learning Environments
as a Way to Improve E-Learning ............................................................ 190
Oliver Kamin, University of Göttingen, Germany
Svenja Hagenhoff, University of Göttingen, Germany
Chapter XI. The Effect of Culture on Email Use: Implications for Distance Learning ........................................................................................... 213
Jonathan Frank, Suffolk University, Boston, USA
Janet Toland, Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand
Karen Schenk, K. D. Schenk and Associates Consulting, USA
Section III: Building an Organization for
Successful Distance Educations Programs
Chapter XII. A Strategy to Expand the University Education Paradigm:
Selling Online Class Resources .............................................................. 235
Richard Ryan, University of Oklahoma, USA
Chapter XIII. Return on Investment for Distance Education Offerings:
Developing a Cost Effective Model ....................................................... 253
Evan T. Robinson, Shenandoah University School of Pharmacy, USA
Chapter XIV. Financing Expensive Technologies in an Era of
Decreased Funding: Think Big ... Start Small ... and Build Fast ....... 278
Yair Levy, Florida International University, USA
Michelle M. Ramim, MIS Consultant, USA
Chapter XV. Education Networks: Expected Market- and CostOriented Benefits ...................................................................................... 302
Svenja Hagenhoff, Georg-August-University Goettingen, Germany
Michaela Knust, Georg-August-University Goettingen, Germany
Chapter XVI. Supplemental Web Sites: An Innovative Use of
Information Technology for Instructional Delivery ............................. 322
Malini Krishnamurthi, California State University, Fullerton, USA
About the Authors ..................................................................................... 340
Index ............................................................................................................ 349
vi
Preface
Universities are embracing distance education, yet most are not making the
changes necessary to maximize the effectiveness and efficiency of online
learning. Historically, universities have designed and built pedagogies, reward
systems, organizational structures, procedures, and policies to facilitate faceto-face modes of education. University staff and faculty cling to deep-rooted
paradigms, which may have worked well with traditional forms of education,
but do not work well for technologically enhanced distance education. The
majority of online courses utilize pedagogies developed for customary classroom
learning environments. To compensate for the lack of face-to-face interaction,
successful remote courses capitalize on innovative, technology-enabled
methodologies to facilitate and enhance the student learning experience.
Whereas conventional teaching methodologies do not routinely use the power
of technology to assist scholarship, not using these methods may compromise
remote course quality. By clinging to traditional pedagogies, universities often
diminish the potential educational advantages brought by the technologies used
for distance education.
Faculty evaluation and promotion processes reward behaviors desirable in conventional educational environments and fail to recognize and support behaviors
needed in the online environment. University staff, administration, and faculty
are organized to support traditional student populations. Many university policies and procedures rely on face-to-face interactions with students. Institutional systems are designed to meet the needs of face-to-face students. For
example, it may be difficult for the distributed students to obtain help with technical problems due to information technology help desks which do not provide
the services needed to meet the needs of distance students and faculty and the
increased technical demands associated with online learning. Similarly, distance
vii
students may not have access to academic advising and other student support
services.
Distance learning is a good example of a student-centered program, because it
accommodates the lives and lifestyles of students who have jobs and families,
but wish pursue higher education. Distance education allows students a unique
opportunity to pursue a college education, live at home, maintain a career and
enjoy the convenience of anywhere, anytime learning.
Accomplishing high quality distance education will mean that university administrations, faculty, and other constituents will have to make changes. Making
the changes necessary to accommodate effective distance education will be
difficult. Carol Twigg, a leader in the distance education field observes:
“Leaders of the old paradigm have a tremendous amount of time and energy
invested in using the old rules. Consequently, they are often resistant to
change and less likely to look for creative, innovative approaches to new
opportunities. In much the same way that Thomas Kuhn (who first called
our attention to the idea of paradigm shifts) observed scientists trying to
‘save the theory’, so too do defenders of the old paradigm focus their
efforts on old solutions to new problems.”
To succeed in distance education, faculty members must be willing to change
their teaching methods and their reward expectations. Universities will need to
transform their structures, rewards, and policies to accommodate the needs of
distance education programs. In summary, the influx of distance education into
the system is forcing universities to rethink their foundations and shift their
paradigms.
This book discusses the many challenges presented in the distance education
environment, explains needed paradigm changes, portrays innovative approaches
for meeting these challenges, and describes the unique opportunities brought by
distance education technologies. It shares some of the experiences that universities have undergone or are currently undergoing to take advantage of technology-enabled distance learning.
Organization of the Book
The book is organized into three sections. The first section presents strategies
and paradigms for creating successful distance education programs. In this
section, the authors use their vast experiences with diverse distance educa-
viii
tional venues to formulate approaches for facilitating optimal learning experiences. These distance education pioneers share valuable insights into how to
design methodologies and structures to enhance remote learning. The authors’ diverse experiences with distance learning situations enhance the broad
perspective that allows a multitude of design strategies for success.
Section I focuses on strategies and paradigms for distance education. In Chapter 1, the authors describe how, designed properly, distance education classes
can be as effective, or even more effective, than face-to-face courses. The
authors discuss how the tools and technologies used for distance education
courses facilitate learning opportunities not possible in the face-to-face classroom. They also describe the many changes required by students, faculty, and
the university itself to meet these new challenges. Changes in reward systems,
skill sets, and faculty commitment to excellence in teaching necessary for successful paradigm shifts are discussed.
Chapter 2 presents a framework with six levels of design for online and distance programs. This multi-leveled design process is grounded in learning and
change theory, as well as instructional design. This chapter provides a set of
principles for designing effective and efficient online and distance learning programs.
Chapter 3 describes a low cost approach, e-moderating, for developing lectures for new online roles. This chapter considers and explores the knowledge
and skills that the best e-moderators have and how they can be recruited, trained
and developed.
In Chapter 4, the authors illustrate how respectful partnerships can be developed where communities control how their knowledge is used and retained
while tapping into the potential of new technologies and maintaining an appropriate level of quality. They demonstrate the potential of this philosophy by
examining two pilot programs for indigenous learners.
Section II focuses on instructional, course development and quality issues.
Moving from traditional classroom to online and distance learning programs
takes innovation and careful planning. The authors in this section suggest indicators and strategies for maintaining quality throughout the design and implementation process.
Chapter 5 discusses the fundamental changes necessary for instructors to make
distance learning more effective and appropriate for a growing audience. The
authors present the areas of competence important for distance teaching, such
as course planning and organization, verbal and nonverbal presentation skills,
and questioning strategies. They also provide practical guidelines and examples
for designing online courses.
Chapter 6 adapts systems theory to distance education. Using an educational
process model, the authors examine inputs, process and outputs that lead to a
list of best practices for tackling the virtual classroom. Internal and external
ix
assessment guidelines help direct successful outputs in the distance learning
process.
Chapter 7 identifies key components of distance education satisfaction based
on previous research by comparing traditional and distance education environments. The authors administer a questionnaire based on these components to
341 MBA distance students and factor the results into five constructs that correlate well with the satisfaction ratings of the subjects.
Chapter 8 acknowledges the challenges surrounding assessment techniques in
online education at the higher education level. It asks specifically, “How do we
know our online students are learning?” To answer this question with confidence, various strategies ranging from participation techniques to online group
work, peer and self-assessment, as well as journals and portfolios, are described.
In Chapter 9, the authors describe a comparison between two sections of a
graduate programming class, where one is an on-campus class and the other a
distance class. Differences in perceived test performance were found between
sections. Possible causes, implications, and suggestions for future research
are explored.
In Chapter 10 the authors contend that conventional electronic learning materials are only suitable for a small target audience and cover only a few learning
styles. They provide examples of the development of high quality and economically sensible distance learning materials. After discussion and evaluation
of conventional materials, the authors guide the readers through the development of online study materials using modular construction. Necessary consideration of multiple interests and learning styles are discussed.
Chapter 11 looks at the effect of cultural differences on e-mail usage. Differences in use of technology-enabled communication can have large implications
in the distance learning process. The authors examine how students from Collectivist versus Individualistic cultures utilize e-mail communication in distance
education courses and the challenges these differences present.
Section III examines a variety of issues and strategies for building successful
distance learning programs and the organizations that support them. The authors in this section discuss changes from conventional thought concerning funding, building and delivery for online programs. Starting small, building fast,
innovative technology use, cost-oriented benefits, and return on investment are
all issues discussed.
In Chapter 12 the author suggests a variation from the traditional approach for
packaging and delivering Internet education. One strategy is to look beyond the
“class” delivery approach. The premise for this strategy is the belief that the
greatest strength of the Internet for education may lie in delivery of class “components,” not classes, themselves. Online components can be used, not to replace, but to supplement and add value to the traditional class experience. This
x
strategy proposes that the universities provide, sponsor, administer and maintain an automated online portal to post and sell faculty created material.
Chapter 13 identifies ways in which institutions can maximize their return on
investment for distance education offerings through the appropriate and timely
re-purposing of the online content for different markets. A transformative income generation (TIG) model is suggested as a means of generating additional
revenue by leveraging existing assets. Targeted application of this model is
used to maximize return on investment for online distance education development.
Chapter 14 examines two common approaches that higher education institutions pursue when implementing online learning programs and provides the rationale for their success or failure. The authors define, propose, and categorize
a set of eight key elements of a successful online learning program implementation in an era of decreased funding. The chapter also contains a case study
involving the development of a successful self-funding online learning program
in the college of business administration at a southeastern state university.
Chapter 15 describes an inter-university education network and the expected
effects of co-operational activities. This chapter focuses on both cost-oriented
and market-oriented benefits of the education network WINFOLine. Additional cost and market advantages of WINFOLine are discussed also. The
authors initiate further discussions by looking at some problems and questions
about managing open education networks in a co-operational environment.
Chapter 16 presents the results from an empirical study that show students
perceive a face-to-face course supported by a web site to be useful in enhancing their academic performance. Almost all the students made use of the classroom lectures and web site resources, without feeling the need to stay away
from lectures. Since learning can now be done synchronously or asynchronously, individually or collaboratively, at any time or place through the use of
technology, the task of incorporating technology judiciously into the learning
environment becomes a new challenge. A plethora of opportunities exist and
those choices come with varying degrees of challenge and success.
Acknowledgments
The editors would like to acknowledge the many people who made this project
possible. We appreciate the help and cooperation of the chapter authors included in this volume. We appreciate the quality of their work and it has been
a pleasure working with them. Many served as referees for chapters submitted by other authors and took the time to provide comprehensive reviews and
constructive comments. These were invaluable during the final selection and
xi
revision process. We are enormously grateful to Evan Robinson and Elizabeth
Buchanan for taking on the extra reviews needed to get this work accomplished. We especially want to thank those authors whose chapters have contributed to the quality of both of our distance education books: Kim Dooley, M.
Ben Martz, Morgan Shepherd, Elizabeth Buchanan, and Richard Ryan.
We want to acknowledge the assistance of the talented staff at Idea Group
Publishing, also. We extend our thanks and appreciation to all of the editors
and staff at Idea Group Publishing, without whom the writing of this book would
not have been possible. The editorial staff’s support and quick responses to
our inquiries helped facilitate the process and keep the project on schedule.
We especially appreciate Michele Rossi’s guidance and help in managing the
project from start to finish. Jan Travers’ editorial assistance was key in producing a high quality product. We benefited from Mehdi Khosrow-Pour’s guidance in the early formulation of the book. Carrie Skovrinskie’s correspondence
and efforts kept the marketing plan moving forward.
The preparation of a book of this kind is dependent on excellent colleagues and
the three of us have been fortunate in this regard. Through inspiration and
encouragement, it has been a team effort from start to finish.
Last, but not least, I, Caroline, want to thank my husband and my children for
their love, support, and patience during this project. I thank Devon Pasquariello
for excellent editorial suggestions. I also am grateful to Karen and Dick for
being the best possible partners on both books.
From Dick, as always, I am especially grateful for the support of my co-editors,
friends, associates, and family. The time and energy spent on editing and writing this, plus other articles and books has been greatly facilitated by their encouragement, patience and understanding.
From Karen to Katie and Robert, whose encouragement and love has allowed
me to complete another project with interesting and inspiring colleagues —
thank you, Dick and Carol, also.
Caroline Howard
Richard Discenza
Karen D. Schenk
Section I
Strategies and Paradigms
How Distance Programs will Affect Students, Courses and Faculty 1
Chapter I
How Distance
Programs will Affect
Students, Courses,
Faculty and
Institutional Futures1
Murray Turoff
New Jersey Institute of Technology, USA
Richard Discenza
University of Colorado at Colorado Springs, USA
Caroline Howard,
Techknowledge-E Systems, USA
Abstract
Designed properly, distance education classes can be at least as effective
and, in some ways, even more effective than face-to-face courses. The tools
and technologies used for distance education courses facilitate learning
opportunities not possible in the face-to-face classroom. Distance programs
are accelerating changes that are challenging students, faculty, and the
university, itself. Currently, most faculty are rewarded for the quality of
instruction, as well as their external funding and their research. Often,
university administrators focus more attention on the efficiency of teaching
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
2 Turoff, Discenza and Howard
than on its effectiveness. In the future, as the quality of distance learning
increases, the primary factor for success will be the faculty’s commitment
to excellence in teaching. Many institutions will be forced to reevaluate the
quality of teaching as the institution becomes more visible to the public, to
legislators who support higher education, and to prospective students.
Introduction
People usually assume that students in distance education programs are at a
disadvantage. On the contrary, it is probably not the distance student who is
disadvantaged, but rather many face-to-face students. Learning is enhanced by
the physical and social technologies typically used in distance education.
Students in distance programs have access to tools that allow them to repeat
lectures and interact with their fellow students and faculty. Contrast these
students with a student sitting in a 500 student lecture. Which student is most at
a distance?
In the early 1980s, a research group introduced a computer-mediated system to
a regular face-to-face class. The group felt that there was enormous potential
for this technology to enhance learning. The system was introduced to students
in a number of Computer Science and Information System courses. Due to the
amount of material covered in lectures, there was not much time for dialogue and
only a few students participated when there was a class discussion. The
instructors introduced asynchronous group communication technologies to communicate discussion questions and assigned grade point credits for student
participation. One hundred percent of the students participated in these discussions outside of regular classroom hours. The extent and depth of the discussions
changed the nature of the classes. Most importantly, student contributions were
comprehensive, with more well-thought-out comments, because students had
the time to reflect on the ongoing discussion before participating. Also very
significant was that students, for whom English was a second language, became
equal participants. They could reread the online discussion as many times as
needed before replying. The computer-based activity monitoring and transcripts,
electronic recordings of the discussions, showed that foreign students spent two
to three times more in a reading mode and reread many discussions, far more than
the American students.
This ability to monitor activities and review the electronic transcripts gives the
instructor insights into how students are learning. By reviewing the transcripts
of the online discussions, it becomes obvious what and how students are learning.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
How Distance Programs will Affect Students, Courses and Faculty 3
For courses with high pragmatic content, such as upper level and graduate
courses in topics like the design and management of computer applications,
students are required to utilize problem-solving approaches to evaluate the tradeoffs between conflicting objectives. In a traditional classroom environment,
especially in large classes, it is very difficult to detect whether students are
accurately incorporating the problem-solving mental models that the instructor
is attempting to convey. Reviewing the transcripts of class discussions can
provide insight into the approaches students are taking to master the material.
Unfortunately, in the early 1980s no one wanted to hear about a revolution in
normal classroom teaching or was willing to expend the effort to dramatically
improve classroom education. It was only those interested in distance education
who were interested in learning about the educational potential of the technology.
As a result, in the mid 1980s the researchers at New Jersey’s Institute of
Technology (NJIT) obtained research funding to investigate distance education
applications of Computer Mediated Communications (CMC). Since NJIT, at the
time, had no distance program they created distance sections of regular courses
that were used with regular on-campus students taking most other courses faceto-face.
This effort (Hiltz, 1994) utilized quasi-experimental studies that compared a
population of students (only familiar with face-to-face classroom education) to
a population of students taking the same courses in pure face-to-face sections
with pure distance sections using only CMC technology. The students in the
matched sections had the same material, the same assignments, the same exams
and the same instructor. They found no significant difference in the amount of
learning or the rate of student satisfaction. This finding is much more significant
than a determination based on a study that included a population of distance
learners already familiar with traditional correspondence classes. Two critical
underlying variables driving the success of this approach were identified by Starr
Roxanne Hiltz (Hiltz, 1994). First, the role the instructor needed to take was
different from the traditional classroom role. The instructor acted more as an
active and dedicated facilitator rather than traditional teacher, as well as a
consulting expert on the content of the course. Second, collaborative learning
and student teamwork were the educational methodology (Hiltz, 1994) which
was shown in later studies to be a key factor in making distance courses as good
or better than face-to-face courses (Hiltz and Wellman, 1997).
These results indicate that distance courses can be as effective as face-to-face
courses when using any of the traditional measures, such as exams and grades.
However, these traditional measures may be inadequate to measure of many of
the benefits observed in classes that utilize computer-mediated communications
technology for a number of reasons:
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
4 Turoff, Discenza and Howard
•
Due to social pressures, students tend to be more concerned with how other
students view their work quality than how the professor views it. They are
significantly more motivated to participate in a meaningful way when their
fellow students can view their contributions.
•
When equality of communications is encouraged, students cannot get away
with being passive or lazy. The transcript or electronic recording of the
discussions shows who is and is not participating. It is visible to both the
instructor and other students that someone is being lazy. (In fact, students
seem to be more concerned with what the other students will think of their
performance than what the professor will think.)
•
The scope of what the outstanding students learn becomes even more
noticeable.
•
The performance of students at the lower end of the distribution is
improved. The communications systems permit them to catch up, because
they are able to obtain a better understanding of the material with which
they are most uncomfortable or have the least background knowledge.
•
The instructor can become more aware of his/her successes or failures
with individual students because of the reflective nature of the student
contributions to the discussion.
While these conclusions need confirmation through long-term longitudinal studies of student performances, the marketplace is also providing confirmation of
the beliefs held by many experienced in teaching these classes. We are seeing
that collaboratively oriented programs offer a solution to the problems, which are
inherent in traditional correspondence courses.
Students benefit from the ability to electronically store lectures alone or in chunks
integrated into other material on the Web. Electronic storage of lectures gives
all students the power to choose freely whether they want to attend a face-toface class or take the same course remotely. Traditional face-to-face students
can later hear a lecture missed due to illness or travel. Students with English as
a second language can listen to a lecture multiple times. Face-to-face students
who have to travel or fall sick can use the same tapes to catch up and/or review
material prior to exams.
In our view a student in a face-to-face class that is not augmented by a
collaborative learning approach and by asynchronous group communications
technology is not getting as good of an education as the distance student who has
those benefits. It is the face-to-face student who may be suffering from the
segregation of the college system into separate face-to-face and distance
courses. These observations about the past and the present lead to some
speculations about the future.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
How Distance Programs will Affect Students, Courses and Faculty 5
The Changing Nature of Academic
Courses
A vital role of college education is to convey the mental model and pragmatics
of a subject matter. To ensure learning of complex subject matter, an instructor
needs to communicate his/her mental model and accompanying problem-solving
approaches. The model, or structure and dimensions to understand and organize
the material, along with the pragmatics of the subject matter become the
student’s starting point. These allow him/her to build the details, acquire new
knowledge, and apply information in new situations. The more pragmatic the
course content is, the more important it becomes for the instructor to convey his
or her mental models and assess student assimilation.
Communication among students and with the instructor is particularly valuable
in courses with high pragmatic content. By discussing and comparing their
interpretations, student can reinforce their understanding and reduce their
conceptual errors. Mixing distance and face-to-face students in the same
discussion space results in having students with a great deal of work experience
virtually mingle with those who have had none. Often undergraduate students
who take distance courses are working, and most of those in the face-to-face
courses are not working. Mixing both a distance and a face-to-face class leads
to a better balance of backgrounds. Students, who have work experience, may
have had an example from their life that illustrates a theoretical concept
presented in the class. When a student shares this experience, it reinforces the
importance of the concept and encourages other students to pay attention to the
presentation.
Creative, interactive software programs accompanied with background tutoring
can effectively teach students to master the skills currently taught in many
undergraduate courses. When these courses are automated, the costs incurred
are far below typical college tuition. In the future, colleges and universities will
not be able to continue to charge current tuition costs for introductory courses
that are largely skill oriented. For example, there are many stand-alone and Webbased software programs that offer introductory programming courses, as well
as skills in many other areas. These courses are comparable to college courses
and some are even based upon a textbook used on some college campuses. They
are available for a few hundred dollars. The major difference is that they do not
carry college credits.
At the other extreme we have the usual “skimming of the cream” that occurs
with every change in technology. Today, private firms are willing to invest a
millions dollars in single multimedia, largely automated courses to sell to industry
that can afford to pay thousands of dollars of tuition for each student. When all
the downsizing of outdated professionals was occurring, one of the first things
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
6 Turoff, Discenza and Howard
to go was the elaborate investment these companies had made in internal course
offerings and video classrooms and networks. Some companies had created their
own internal college and claimed their employees did not need outside education.
This type of thinking, like the concept of “just-in-time learning,” which may be
a euphemism for “teach them only what they need to know in order to do their
current job,” does not prioritize student growth and learning. Unfortunately,
some institutions of higher education are no longer certain about whether their
client is the student or industry. Until an enlightened consumer marketplace
emerges, many transient but inferior offerings will be available on the market.
With the recent recession we find some institutions, like Duke, have cancelled
their on-line executive M.B.A., for which they were charging twice the tuition
of the on-campus offering. The recession has had the obvious results of
discouraging and terminating a number of private sector efforts to enter the
distance education market. The cream has largely turned sour.
Now that we have a national and international competitive market in courses,
those colleges that accept skill knowledge from unaccredited sources, such as
training courses and work experience, will obtain a market edge over those that
do not. In fact, the student population will begin to expect institutions of higher
learning to accept courses from any accredited institution.
In addition, institutions with clearly stated credit transfer policies will also obtain
a marketplace edge. Individual courses, as well as total programs, will be the
basic units in a national and international marketplace for higher education.
There are no longer geographical monopolies on higher education. Only consortiums based upon real cooperation among the participating institutions will
succeed. Many current attempts to market only the separate offerings of the
participating institutions, or to impose added layers of administration between the
courses and the students, are doomed to a marketplace failure.
The single noncommercial web site that focuses on distance education utilizing
group communications is that of the Society for Asynchronous Learning Networks (http://www.aln.org). There are numerous group conferences for educators and administrators, as well as a newsletter and journal.
Role of the Faculty
In any meaningful educational program, the major responsibilities for a given
course should be the responsibility of a faculty member, including:
•
Course design
•
Choice and creation of course materials and assignments
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
How Distance Programs will Affect Students, Courses and Faculty 7
•
Approval and mentoring of instructors, adjuncts, and Ph.D. students who
will also teach the course
•
•
Performance monitoring of other instructors, adjuncts, and Ph.D. students
Course and material updates
The technology allows senior professors or department chairs to effectively
evaluate and mentor all instructors of particular courses, whether they are
teaching traditional classroom courses or distance courses. The ability to review
whole class discussions after the class is over gives senior faculty the ability to
evaluate distance instructors hired to teach previously developed courses, as
well as to review on-site instructors and junior faculty. Thus, they can improve
and extend their mentorship and apprenticing relationships.
While educational institutions are rapidly developing programs for large populations of distance students, it does not appear that universities are creating tenured
faculty lines that can be occupied by remote faculty. When additional faculty are
needed to teach distance courses, instructors, rather than tenure track faculty,
are often sought. Since the success of distance courses is largely dependent
upon the capabilities of the instructor responsible for the particular course, the
value of instructors able to master teaching at a distance will rise within
institutions of higher education.
The technology we are using for distance education can allow faculty members
to live anywhere they want to. Unique benefits will be available to outstanding
teaching faculty. For example, one of the best full-time instructors for NJIT,
which is located in beautiful downtown Newark, is a mother with two small
children who never has to be on campus. She is teaching other instructors how
to teach remotely. Similarly, a University of Colorado accounting professor, on
sabbatical in Thailand, is able to teach a course in the Distance M.B.A. program.
There have been a few master programs where some or all of the instructors are
located anywhere in the world. It is technically feasible for those wanting to
escape winter cold to teach in places such as Hawaii that we could only dream
about. The technology makes it feasible, but various administrative policies,
unions, insurance companies, benefit programs, etc., have not yet caught up to
the technology. There is increasing emphasis by accrediting agencies on treating
remote instructors the same as faculty are treated. This is likely to bringing about
a greater degree of equality between instructors and tenured track faculty. The
outcome is uncertain, but it may mean that the costs for remote and traditional
classes will equalize so that the profit margin in on-line classes will not be quite
so high.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
8 Turoff, Discenza and Howard
Role of the Technology
Some functions of technology that can facilitate this function are:
Asynchronous discussions: In the online environment, students can take as
much time as they need to reflect on a discussion and polish their comments. This
improves the quality of the discussion and changes the psychology and the
sociology of communications. Students can address topics in the sequence they
chose rather than in a predefined order. This leads to the development of
different problem-solving strategies among the individual members of the class.
Instructor control of online conference and roles: With online course
conferences (many per course), instructors control the membership of each,
assign roles and enable other instructors to monitor conferences for joint
teaching exercises involving more than one course. Groups within courses are
able to set up private online conferences for team and collaborative work group
assignments. Joint editing of items facilitates team work.
Question and answer communication protocol: Instructors are able to ask
questions during discussions. They can control who views the answer and
prevent other students from seeing the answer of the others or engaging in the
resulting discussion until they have entered their answer. In studies of Group
Decision Support Systems, it has been shown that asynchronous groups in an
online Delphi mode generate many more ideas than unstructured discussions or
face-to-face groups of similar size (Hee-Kyung et al., 2003). This area has
proven to be a valuable tool in forcing equal participation. Use of question-andanswer communication protocol can be used to force each student to independently think through their answer without being influenced by the other students.
Anonymity and pen name signatures: When students with work experience
are part of a discussion, they can use their real life experiences to illustrate the
concepts the professor is presenting. Such comments from fellow students,
rather than the professor, often make the instructor’s message more meaningful
to the students. A student confirming the theory presented by a faculty member
through real life examples is more effective in making a point than “dry” data
from an instructional article. Furthermore, students can talk about disasters in
their companies with respect to decisions in any area and provide detail, including
costs, when they are not identified and the anonymity of the company they work
for is preserved Also, the use of pen names allow individuals to develop
alternative personas without divulging their real identity and is extremely useful
in courses that wish to employ role playing as a collaborative learning method.
Membership status lists: The monitoring of activities, such as students’
reading and responding to communications, allows the professor to know what
each individual has read and how up-to-date each student is in the discussion.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
How Distance Programs will Affect Students, Courses and Faculty 9
This allows the instructor to detect when a student is falling behind. Student
collaborative teams can make sure that everyone in the team is up to date.
Furthermore, students can easily compare their frequency of contributions
relative to other students in the course.
Voting: Instant access to group and individual opinions on resolutions and issues
are enabled by voting capabilities. This is useful for promoting discussion and the
voting process is continuous so that changes of views can be tracked by
everyone. Voting is not used to make decisions. Rather, its function is to explore
and discover what are the current agreements and disagreements or uncertainties (polarized vs. flat voting distributions) so that the class can focus the
continuing discussion on the latter. Students may change their votes at anytime
during the discussion.
Special purpose scaling methods: These useful methods show true group
agreements and minimize ambiguity. Currently we have a system which allows
each student at the end of the course to contribute a statement of what they think
is the most important thing they have learned in the course and then to have
everyone vote by rank ordering all the items on the list. The results are reported
using Thurstone’s scaling, which translates the rank order by all the individuals
to a single group interval scale. In this interval scale if 50% prefer A to B and
50% prefer B to A, the two items will be at the same point on the scale. It has
been surprising what some of the results have been in some courses. For
example, in a management of Information Systems course the concept of
“runaway” software projects was felt to be twice as important as any other topic.
The professor was quite surprised by this result until he began to realize that the
students were using this concept of a mental model in which to integrate many
of the other things they had learned.
Information overload: This occurs when enthusiastic discussions by students
that are meant to augment the quality of the learning process augment only the
quantity of the number of comments, instead, leading to the problem of
“information overload.” Currently this phenomenon limits the size of the group
that can be in a single CMC class. Online discussions allow individuals to enter
comments whenever it is convenient for them, without waiting for someone else
to finish the point they were trying to make. This makes it physically possible and
also very likely that a great deal more discussion will take place and much more
information will be exchanged among the group than if only one person can speak
at a time, as in the face-to-face classroom environment. Anything that reduces
the temptation of some students to “contribute” comments or messages that have
nothing to do with the meaningful discussions underway will increase the
productivity of the discussion without information overload setting in. Among
such functional tools the computer can provide are:
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
10 Turoff, Discenza and Howard
Class gradebooks: This eliminates a tremendous amount of electronic
mail traffic that would become very difficult for an individual instructor to
manage with a large class.
Selection lists: The instructor can set up lists of unique choices so that
each student may choose only one item and others can see who has chosen
what. This is very efficient for conveying individualized assignments and
reduces a large portion of communications.
Factor lists: Members of a class or group can add ideas, dimensions, goals,
tasks, factors, criteria, and other items to a single, shared list which may
then be discussed and modified based upon that discussion and later voted
upon.
Notifications: Short alerts notify individuals when things occur that they
need to know about. For instance, students can be notified that a new set
of grades or vote distribution has been posted, eliminating the need for
individuals to check for these postings. People can attach notifications to
conference comments from a select list that provides alternatives like: I
agree, I disagree, I applaud, Boo! Such appendages reduce significantly
the need to provide paralinguistic cues of reinforcement as additional
separate comments.
Calendars, agendas or schedules: Students have access to a space to
track the individual and collaborative assignments and their due dates.
These are listed in an organized manner that links detailed explanations for
each assignment, as well as questions and answers related to the assignments.
The State of the Technology
The technology available today includes at least 250 versions of group communication software. However, some of them may not survive the recession.
There are a growing number of software packages for course management. The
online learning product landscape is changing at a rapid pace as companies are
acquiring their competitors to expand functionality. A recent article gives an
excellent summary of the popular platforms and the evolving nature of eLearning
(Gray, 2002).
There are only a few of these that have wide usage and they are beginning to
raise their prices to capitalize on their popularity. Most of these packages charge
a fee per user, which is not the desirable fee structure for the customer. Many
of the older conferences systems charge on a per server basis and it does not
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
How Distance Programs will Affect Students, Courses and Faculty 11
matter how many students one has. It is far cheaper to spend more on the
hardware and a get a more powerful server. Also, the course management
systems do not provide many of the useful software features one would like to
have for group communications. Given the way prices are going, it might be
better to pay some of the undergraduate students to educate some of the faculty
on how to create their own web sites and have their own pages for their courses
that they update and maintain directly. This also has desirable long-term
consequences in raising the ability of the faculty in this area. Once you have
committed all your content to one vendor’s system, you are a captured customer
and will have to pay whatever they want to charge. Right now, software
development is undergoing rapid evolution and no customer should put themselves in the box of only being able to use one vendor. If it is clear you are using
a number of vendors, you may even be able to get some breaks on pricing and
will certainly get the top level of service when each of them knows there is an
alternative service readily available to the customer. In the coming decade, one
can expect major upgrades of these software systems every few years and the
best one today may not be the best one tomorrow.
Course Development and Delivery
Technology
Unfortunately, many faculty do not know how to use the technology to design a
successful course. As the historical record shows, it is a mistake when
transferring an application to computers to just copy the way it used to be done
onto the computer. Utilizing the methodology of collaborative learning is the key
to designing courses using group communications technology. Simple systems,
which attempt to impose a discussion thread on top of what is electronic mail
technology, allow the student or the teacher only to view one comment at a time.
This approach does not allow an individual to grasp the totality of any complex
discussion. Only by placing the complete discussion thread in a single scrolling
page can a person review and understand a long discussion. They can browse
the discussion and cognitively comprehend it without having to perform extra
operations and loose their cognitive focus. Users of such simple systems cannot
generate a large complex discussion and have no way of realizing that complex
discussion is even possible.
When online discussions are successful, they can easily go from enthusiastic
wonderful discussions to information overload. To maximize the power of the
technology to facilitate collaborative learning, critical development directions for
the future should include:
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
12 Turoff, Discenza and Howard
•
•
•
•
Tailorability of communication structures by instructor
•
•
•
Tools for collaborative model building
•
Tools for the analysis of alternative diagrams
Tailorability of communication protocols by instructor
Anonymity and pen name provisions
Delphi method tools and the availability of scaling and social judgment
(voting methods)
Powerful information retrieval capabilities
Tailorability by instructor of application-oriented icons and graphical components
Instructors also need to allow students to extend the discourse structure and to
vote on the significance of incidents of relationships among factors in the problem
domain by using Group Decision Support processes. The system should allow
students to not only develop their own conceptual maps for understanding a
problem, but also to detect disagreements about elements of the conceptual map
and the meanings of terms. This is valuable preparation for problem solving in
their professional life, a process that requires removing inherent ambiguities and
individual meanings in the language used to communicate about a problem with
others from diverse backgrounds.
Routines should be included that are based upon both scaling and social judgment
theories which improve the ability of larger groups to quickly reach mutual
understanding. Currently, few tools exist in current systems that support the use
of collaborative model building, gaming, and Delphi exercises. The current
generation of software does not often include the functions of anonymity and pen
names.
Course instructors need to have complete control over course communication
structures and processes and should be able to use their recently acquired
knowledge for future offerings of the course. Currently, systems lack the needed
integration of functions to easily evolve the changes in both the relationships and
the content in a given field. A long-term advantage of teaching in the collaborative electronic environment is that the students create useful material for future
offerings and can aid the instructor in monitoring the new professional literature.
Future technology will allow faculty to organize their material across a whole set
of courses into a collaborative knowledge base available to the faculty teaching
those courses. This would allow students and faculty would be able to create
trails for different objectives and weave the material in that knowledge base to
suit a group of students or a set of learning objectives. Individual learning teams
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
How Distance Programs will Affect Students, Courses and Faculty 13
would be able to progress through a degree program’s knowledge base at the rate
best for them, rather than setting the same timeframe for all learning teams or
faculty teams. Faculty, individuals or teams would take responsibility for a
specific domain with in the web of knowledge representing a degree program.
Collaborative technologies are changing the concept of what constitutes a
course. Program material could be an integrated knowledge web based largely
on semantic hypertext structures. Over time, the domain experts, the faculty,
would continue to develop and evolve their parts of the web and wait for learning
groups, composed of any mix of distance and regular students sharing the same
learning objectives and needs.
Current vendor systems focus on the mass market and concentrate on tools to
standardize and present course content. Group communication tools are usually
just disguised message servers that offer only a discussion thread capability and
little more, certainly not the complex capabilities discussed above. Vendors have
not yet recognized the primary importance of group communications and how
faculty members can guide and facilitate the process and be available for
consultation as needed. Based upon the conceptual knowledge maps they design,
faculty should be encouraged to develop content structures that are characteristic of their subject matter. In the end, faculty should have the ability to insert
group communication activities anywhere in their professional knowledge base
(e.g., question/answers, discussion threads, lists, voting, etc.).
Educational Consumerism
Most of today’s distance education course offerings give the illusion of difference by placing materials on the Web, instead of providing them through the mail.
These online course offerings still use the correspondence course model. These
offerings typically include e-mail systems for one-on-one communication between an instructor and an individual student, but do not include effective group
communications featuring course content and delivery methodologies reworked
for a distance-learning environment. E-mail is better than nothing, but no one
would claim that e-mail is preferable to a face-to-face college course. The
typical consumer of distance education does not understand the difference
between courses with only simple e-mail systems and courses that have
introduced sophisticated group communication processes.
Students in the United States pay the equivalent of the price of a used or new car
every year to attend college. A student and his family make a major financial
investment for a college education. Reports evaluating new and used automobile
models and car-buying comparison web sites enable people to obtain detailed
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
14 Turoff, Discenza and Howard
information on any model of car for little or no money. We predict the emergence
of a successful “consumer report” organization for distance learning, similar to
the college guides appearing each year, that will provide details about individual
courses and instructors in different programs, unfiltered and direct from other
students. (Some guides have already appeared, but some of them make money
by charging the schools to list their programs.) There is, as of yet, nothing
comparable to Consumer Reports or even the yearly US News and World
Reports independent rating of universities. Examples of sources now available
are Bears’ Guide to the Best Education Degrees by Distance Learning by
John Bear, Mariah Bear, Tom Head, Thomas Nixon Ten Speed Press (ISBN:
1580083331; September 2001) or Guide to Distance Learning Programs 2003
(Peterson’s Guide to Distance Learning Programs, 2003) Petersons Guides
(ISBN: 0768908191Bk&Cd-Rom edition; October 2002).
Ultimately, these sources will support more intelligent consumerism about
college education. Since distance education eliminates a college’s geographical
monopoly, colleges will be forced to be much more sensitive to consumer
pressures than they have been in the past. Since no educational institution or
organization has had the foresight, so far, to do this, there is now a commercial
Web firm that sells books, student services and other products and has committed
to putting up a recommendation system to evaluate any distance course
anywhere and have the results made Web accessible.
Today, university faculty are not rewarded as much on the quality of instruction
as on their research and external funding. To obtain tenure and promotions, their
instruction quality merely has to be acceptable and new faculty cannot afford to
prioritize exceptional, innovative teaching. The problem is often with university
administrations that focus their attention more on efficiency rather than effectiveness when it comes to teaching.
Instructors and Rewards
Administrations place most of their priority on competitive research and sponsored funds. Many face a rude awakening, as they are less in touch with the fact
that the educational process is undergoing an unanticipated, unexamined, fundamental change. Some of these institutions will not realize until it is too late to
change entrenched attitudes and bureaucratic processes fast enough to compete
in the new competitive environment. During the next decade, many institutions
may fail as a result of intense international and national competition.
In the future, the underlying factor of success will be the faculty’s commitment
to excellence in teaching and the quality and talent of the instructors. Many
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
How Distance Programs will Affect Students, Courses and Faculty 15
institutions will be forced to reevaluate their faculty incentives and the relative
importance of teaching and research. Marketplace mechanisms will also force
this reevaluation, as the relative quality of teaching for each institution becomes
more visible to the public and prospective students. These pressures will force
the threshold for acceptable teaching quality definitely to rise.
As the quality of distance learning increases, the view of distance education
courses as inferior to traditional classes will disappear. It will become the talent
of the instructor and his or her facility that will determine success. Additional
organizational layers of intermediaries will doom a program to failure. For
example, the majority of students taking distance courses in the future will be
regular students who schedule a mix of distance and face-to-face courses to
accommodate their schedule, family commitments, work commitments and their
desire to complete their education in a timely manner. Their course ratings do not
distinguish distance courses and face-to-face courses, but distance courses are
even rated higher in many ways.
Alternative Versions of the Future
Students of the future will have many choices, the spectrum of which can be
illustrated by examples of two students at extremes:
The Positive Future for the Student
After careful consideration of my options, I decided to turn down a scholarship
from an Ivy League university to go to eU (Electronic University). I wanted to
continue learning my family’s business and did not want to move away from my
fiancée. I was able to easily make up for the cost of the eU tuition, which was
about 25% of the traditional school’s, even with the recent 15% tuition reduction
which that school just announced. I was convinced when I discovered that eU
was rated as highly as the Ivy League school for the quality of its courses. The
response of more than three million students in the “Learning Consumer
Database” made the results for most of my courses statistically significant to the
.05 significance level. Also, I found the comments of the professors about their
courses much more extensive in the eU course ratings. Hardly any of the other
school’s professors responded.
All of that encouraged me to check the resumes of most of the eU professors.
The results were quite surprising. Most of them are retired from other universities where they had tenure before they came to eU. They are all paid the same
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
16 Turoff, Discenza and Howard
salary of $150,000 and work out of their homes all over the world. One of them
wrote that 95% of his time and effort is devoted to instructional activities because
eU has eliminated all committees except one to determine the departmental
curriculum.
The eU classes usually range from 20 to 50 students with a great deal of
emphasis on class discussion and collaborative work. The profile of students
shows that over 70% are working in professional areas related to their degree
programs. As a result, class discussions are high caliber. I got to actually
eavesdrop on some ongoing courses once I had submitted an application.
I can take my exams at the local community college, which has a franchise from
eU, and I can also use their sophisticated multimedia computers. eU accepts
courses from any college and university that has accreditation for the same
degree, so I can use another distance program when the course I need is closed
at eU or not offered that semester, without pre-approval. With the threesemesters-per-year program, I can move a lot faster than in most two-semester
programs.
I am concerned, however, with getting in, as I am fresh out of high school and
they take very few students like me. Their rejection rate is much higher than most
Ivy League schools’. I have tried to convince them that my four years of part time
work in the family business should be counted. I hope that helps.
The Negative Future for the Student
I have decided to apply to eU.com rather than Harvard. I really must spend the
time learning the family business and my fiancée has told me in no uncertain
terms that long separations are not in the cards. Oh well, it is a lot cheaper than
Harvard and a lot of those video lectures were prepared by top notch professors
at places like Harvard and the University of Chicago. They claim having a
professor from Harvard on video is far better than just any old professor in a
classroom. Most of the instructors for technology courses are from industry and
I am told that if you get one from the company you are interested in working for
and do a good job, you are more likely to get a job offer in the future. Courses
in other areas seem to be mostly those tapes and automation. They require a
computer joystick for the educational software packages, so the school cannot
be too bad, plus major Hollywood studios produce their multimedia software.
It does worry me that their tuition jumped by 20% in our area as soon as our local
community college went out of business. I did not realize their tuition was
geographically dependent. Their software costs are quite high since each course
uses unique packages, including the ebooks generated by the professors. These
materials seem be undergoing constant revision, but I suspect that is so the prior
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
How Distance Programs will Affect Students, Courses and Faculty 17
year’s material cannot be sold in a secondary market among the students. Even
though the average course size is one thousand students, eU does have these
small discussion sections of 50 to 100 students run by the course graders. So, at
least you can get help when you need it. Still, some courses use automated
graders and I am not clear how that works, yet.
I was told the compositions in the first writing course and the programs in the first
computer course are completely graded by the computer without the need for
any human to look at them. An intelligent system not only designs the exam so
that every exam is unique to every student in the course, but also uses your past
performance profile to tailor the exam to your performance level. This allows
even C students to get high point scores so they can feel good about themselves
and show good results to their parents, who are probably financing their studies.
Students are classified as Outstanding, Above Average, or Average, and then
receive grades within those categories. Everyone has a chance to get a lot of A
grades.
They sent me this funny form with their acceptance letter, where I must promise
to not divulge any of my experiences in courses to any data collection process
not approved by eU.com or they can deny me any future access to my records
and rescind my degree. I don’t understand the reason for that one at all. Oh well,
I have no real choice, given my situation.
Summary
In the first scenario above, the student will receive the same quality of education
whether he studies on campus or at home. He will participate with a group of his
peers and will establish a network of relationships to utilize throughout his career.
He can also get to know his instructors and his fellow students well.
In the second scenario, the student will participate in a distance-learning program
set up like a mass production process. This is a clear second choice, apparently
forced on the student by circumstances and costs. This option sacrifices the
quality of education for the ultimate efficiencies and mass delivery of courses.
The real variable, which will decide between these future alternatives, is whether
higher education institutions integrate all their face-to-face students in the same
communication environment, prioritizing collaboration for all students and rewarding faculty who introduce new technology in this way. Regardless of what
is written down, in most universities the rewards for faculty are inextricably
linked with research and external funding and instruction needs only to be
acceptable to obtain promotion and tenure. Innovation in education and exceptional teaching are not prioritized for young faculty at many institutions.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
18 Turoff, Discenza and Howard
This is clearly a problem with administrations. While administrations focus their
attention on competitive research and sponsored funds, the educational process
is undergoing an unanticipated, unexamined, fundamental change. The next
decade will bring some rude awakenings. Because of the time needed to change
attitudes and bureaucratic processes, some of these awakenings may occur too
late. Competition in instruction on an international and national basis will become
the principle determinant of institutional success or failure in the next decade.
We are entering a free marketplace era for the enterprise of education at the
university level. The Web is the first communication system where consumer
reaction to experiences with alternatives is cheap and easy to collect, organize
and provide. One of the key premises underlying the concept of a free market
is the free flow of relevant information and that is going to happen for individual
courses, as well as degree programs.
The most important factors for future success will be the quality and talent of the
instructors and their commitment to excellence in learning. Many institutions
may well have to reassess the relative imbalance in faculty rewards between
teaching and research. In addition, marketplace mechanisms will make the
quality of teaching more visible to the public and prospective students. We can
expect the threshold for acceptable teaching quality to rise. Regular students will
opt for distance participation in some of their courses, not only because it is
convenient, but also because they perceive no loss of quality. As long as both
versions of the courses utilize the same technology and learning methodology this
is going to be true.
Ultimately, the fundamental changes that could ensure the future success of
university and college level institutions may well have to come from the
accreditation agencies in realizing that we are evolving in a competitive
marketplace and that it is their role to ensure that the consumer has access to the
information needed to make fair market decisions. Ensuring that courses in
accredited degree programs can always be transferred among accredited
institutions and that accreditation might have to be assigned to individual faculty
as well as individual degree programs will most likely be a part of that
evolutionary process.
References
Cho, H. K., Turoff, M. and Hiltz, S. R. (2003, January). The impacts of Delphi
communication structure on small and medium sized asynchronous groups.
In HICSS Proceedings, IEEE Press.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
How Distance Programs will Affect Students, Courses and Faculty 19
Discenza, R., Howard, C. and Schenk, K. (eds.). (2002). The Design and
Management of Effective Distance Learning Programs. Hershey, PA:
Idea Group Publishing.
Gray, S. (2003, August). Moving — elearning vendors take aim in the changing
environment. Syllabus, 16(1), 28-31.
Harasim, L., Hiltz, R., Teles, L. and Turoff, M. (1995). Learning Networks: A
Field Guide to Teaching and Learning Online. MIT Press.
Hiltz, S. R. (1993). Correlates of learning in a virtual classroom. International
Journal Of Man-Machine Studies, 39, 71-98.
Hiltz, S. R. (1994). The Virtual Classroom: Learning Without Limits via
Computer Networks, Human Computer Interaction Series. Intellect
Press.
Hiltz, S. R. and Turoff, M. (1993). The Network Nation: Human Communication via Computer. MIT Press (original edition 1978).
Hiltz, S. R. and Turoff, M. (2002, April). What makes learning networks
effective. Communications of the ACM, 56-59.
Hiltz, S. R. and Wellman, B. (1997, September). Asynchronous learning networks as a virtual classroom. Communications of the ACM, 40(9), 44-49.
Howard, C. and Discenza, R. (1996). A Typology for Distance Learning:
Moving from a Batch to an On-line Educational Delivery System.
Paper to be presented at the Information Systems Educational Conference
(ISECON) in St. Louis, Missouri, (October 1996).
Howard, C. and Discenza, R. (2001). The emergence of distance learning in
higher education: A revised group decision support system typology with
empirical results. In L. Lau (Ed.), Distance Education: Emerging Trends
and Issues. Idea Group Publishing.
McIntyre, S. and Howard, C. (1994, November). Beyond lecture-test: Expanding focus of control in the classroom. Journal of Education for Management Information Systems.
Nelson, T. H. (1965). A file structure for the complex, the changing and the
indeterminate. In ACM 20th National Conference Proceedings (pp. 8499).
Turoff, M. (1995, April). A marketplace approach to the information highway.
Boardwatch Magazine.
Turoff, M. (1996). Costs for the development of a virtual university. Journal of
Asynchronous Learning Networks, 1(1).
Turoff, M. (1997, September). Virtuality. Communications of ACM, 40(9), 3843.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
20 Turoff, Discenza and Howard
Turoff, M. (1998, Spring). Alternative futures for distance learning: The force
and the darkside. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration,
1(1).
Turoff, M. (1999, January/March). Education, commerce, & communications:
The era of Competition. WebNet Journal: Internet Technologies, Applications & Issues, 1(1), 22-31.
Turoff, M. and Hiltz, R. S. (1986). Remote learning: Technologies and opportunities. Proceedings, World Conference on Continuing Engineering
Education.
Turoff, M. and Hiltz, R. S. (1995). Software design and the future of the virtual
classroom. Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education,
4(2), 197-215.
Turoff, M., Hiltz, R., Bieber, M., Rana, A. & Fjermestad, J. (1999). Collaborative Discourse Structures in Computer Mediated Group Communications.
Reprinted in Journal of Computer Mediated Communications on Persistent Conversation, 4(4).
Endnotes
1
A great deal of recent evaluation studies are beginning to confirm our
earlier findings based upon extensive and large scale studies at such places
as SUNY, Drexel, Penn State and others. Some of these may be found in
the Journal of ALN (http://www.aln.org) and on the ALN Evaluation
Community web site (http://www.alnresearch.org).
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Design Levels for Distance and Online Learning
21
Chapter II
Design Levels for
Distance and
Online Learning
Judith V. Boettcher
Designing for Learning, USA
Abstract
This chapter describes a multi-level design process for online and distance
learning programs that builds on a philosophical base grounded in
learning theory, instructional design, and the principles of the process of
change. This chapter does the following: (1) describes a six-level design
process promoting congruency and consistency at the institution,
infrastructure, program, course, activity and assessment level; (2) describes
a conceptual framework for designing online and distance learning
programs; and (3) suggests a set of principles and questions derived from
that framework. The principles are derived from the Vygotskian theory of
cognition that focuses on four core elements of any teaching and learning
experience — the learner, the faculty/teacher/mentor, the content /knowledge
/skill to be acquired/or problem to be solved, and the environment or
context within which the experience will occur. This chapter includes a set
of principle-based questions for designing effective and efficient online
and distance learning programs.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
22 Boettcher
Introduction
What differentiates effective distance learning and online learning programs
from those that are less effective, less efficient or less attractive to students? Do
successful online and traditional programs share a common set of instructional
design principles that might be more consistently applied?
This chapter describes a six-level design process that promotes congruency and
consistency at the institution, infrastructure, program, course, learning, activity
and assessment levels. This multi-level design process builds on a philosophical
base grounded in learning theory and instructional design, as well as in the
principles of change processes. The design process includes perspectives from
a Life Style and Learning Style Design Framework (LS-TWO) that recognizes
the influences of the life styles and learning styles of learners and faculty, and
the challenges and power of the new technologies and their impact on communications and resources. It is hoped that the questions and principles derived from
this framework will support instructional planners in the near term and also into
the future. In summary, the goals and objectives of this chapter are to:
•
Describe a six-level design process incorporating design at the institution,
infrastructure, program, course, activity and assessment level.
•
Describe a conceptual framework for designing online and distance
learning programs.
•
Suggest a set of principles and questions derived from that framework.
When a reader completes the chapter, they should have at their disposal a set of
principles and questions for designing effective and efficient online and distance
learning programs. These principles are derived from the Vygotskian theory of
cognition that focuses on four core elements of any teaching and learning
experience. Those four elements are: the learner, the faculty/teacher/mentor,
the content /knowledge/skill to be acquired/or problem to be solved, and the
environment or context within which the experience will occur.
Design Principle for Planning Distance
and Online Learning
A fundamental principle for designing online and distance learning is that design
happens not just at the course or program level by a faculty member. Achieving
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Design Levels for Distance and Online Learning
23
effective and efficient online and distance learning programs requires research,
planning, and program design on many levels.
Institutions with a successful track record in this area often approach each
degree, each certificate program, each outreach effort, as a distinct “product
offering” for which a business plan must be researched and developed. For
institutions wanting to get started in offering courses online or at a distance, this
can be a good strategy, as it makes visible many of the unanticipated requirements and services for providing teaching and learning in virtual or distant
spaces.
Designing online and distance learning programs on a broad scale is an
institutional commitment, requiring design at a minimum of six levels corresponding to the components of teaching and learning experiences and to the structure
of an institution’s delivery systems. The next section briefly describes these six
levels of design and provides lists of questions to help the design process at each
level.
Six Levels of Design
Effective instructional design for online and distance learning usually requires
instructional planning at these six levels:
•
•
Institutional design — congruence with institutional mission
•
•
•
•
Degree, curriculum, program, or certificate design
Infrastructure design — management of and access to student services,
faculty services, learning resource services
Course design
Unit and learning activity design
Student assessment design
Effective articulation of the institutional and infrastructure design levels is a
campus wide responsibility generally led by a group or committee composed of
representatives of faculty, staff, students and administration. These two toplevel designs are best served with the involvement of those representing the
entire campus community and high-level leadership. Why is this multi-level
design process recommended? Because it supports effective and efficient
online and distance learning by incorporating an institution-wide vision for
students and for the teaching and learning environment used by students and
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
24 Boettcher
faculty. To work well, the institutional vision reflects a shared philosophy of
teaching and learning.
A shared philosophy of teaching and learning cannot be assumed, nor can it be
easily or quickly achieved. Fortunately, it is not necessary for design to be
operationalized at the campus level to launch a single online or distance learning
program. Many successful online and distance programs can be and are
envisioned and designed at the college level and at the graduate professional level
with only nominal support at the institutional level. However, any online or
distance program requires close cooperation and visioning with the central
infrastructure operations group.
The design approach for a college program is the same as the design at the
institutional level; what changes is the unit of design and the analysis and
processes for design. The primary goal is that of design congruence among goals,
infrastructure, program, students, activities and evaluation.
Characteristics of the Design Process
A key characteristic of instructional design is its iterative nature. All systems
are by their very nature interdependent with the other elements within the
system. As systems change and as the environment within and about an
institution changes, all elements of a system need to be systematically reviewed
to be congruent and consistent with one another. This means that the timing of
the design at each level must be planned for as well. Is design ever complete?
Only temporarily.
Another key characteristic of design is perspective. Ideally, groups responsible
for design of teaching and learning should share common philosophies and
viewpoints. How we think about teaching and learning impacts the decisions we
make regarding environment, expectations, resources and goals. This is why our
institutional staff, including developers of content and systems should all be
constantly learning, not just about technologies and systems, but also about
teaching and learning. How we think impacts how we act and how we design.
Even decisions about the design of administrative systems cannot be done in
isolation from the design of courses and degrees. For example, the process of
applying to an institution, of being admitted to an institution, and queries about
programs all become part of the total learning experience for students. All
interactions between students and the institution are impacted by design and
behind the design is the “code” which captures and, all too often, causes design
to become rigid and to become its own law, however unintended (Lessig, 1999).
Ideally, the design at each of these six levels reflects philosophies of teaching and
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Design Levels for Distance and Online Learning
25
learning that are consistent with the institutional mission and consistent with the
expectations of the students and society being served. Figure 1 summarizes these
six levels of design, and identifies the group or individuals usually responsible for
the design at that level. The length of time for a design cycle at each level is also
suggested.
Six Levels of Design for Learning
The Lifestyle and Learning Style Design Framework (LS-TWO) that is the
described later in this chapter suggests a philosophical basis for design based in
constructivism and the learning theories of Vygotsky (Vygotsky, 1962, 1978).
The principles suggested by this framework — or by any other chosen framework — inform all six levels of design.
The people involved in designing for teaching and learning at an institutional and
infrastructure level include a wide range of institutional faculty and staff.
Viewing design as a multi-level process keeps the process practical and realistic.
Design decisions at the infrastructure and institutional level require consensus
followed by time for design and implementation. Design decisions at the program
and course level require a faculty team consensus. Some design decisions at the
course, unit and assessment levels can be made more quickly, but must be made
within the context and within the framework of the infrastructure design and
resources design.
Level One: Institutional Design
The design work to be done at an institutional level is similar to strategic planning
and positioning of an institution. A good clue to an institution’s current strategic
Figure 1. Six Levels of Design
Six Levels of Design
Design Responsibility
Sponsor/Leader
Institution
Entire campus leadership
and community
Campus and Technology
Staff
College/Deans/Faculty
Faculty
Faculty
Provost, CIO and Vice3-5 Years
presidents
Provost, CIO and Vice2-3 Years
presidents
Dean and Chairs
1-3 Years
Dept. Chair
1-2 Years
Faculty and/or Faculty team 1-2 Years
Faculty
Faculty and/or Faculty team
Infrastructure
Degree, Program
Course
Unit/Learning
Activity
Student Assessment
Design and
Review Cycle
1-2 Years
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
26 Boettcher
positioning is completing an association test. For example, what type of student
comes to mind when MIT is mentioned? Focused, talented engineering and
technical students. What type of learning experience comes to mind when
Oberlin College is mentioned? Liberal arts colloquia with active, involved
students. When the Open University of the UK is mentioned? Working
professionals doing online and distance learning supplemented by tutors. Or Penn
State University? Large, land grant institution with a wide variety of applied
sciences and disciplines — and yes, a great football team! An institutional design
includes completing this association test, both for what the associations are now
and what an institution wants them to be in the future.
Institutional planning generally begins with an institution’s current vision and
mission statements and then proceeds through a data collection and input process
that addresses a set of questions such as the following.
Institutional questions:
•
•
•
•
•
•
What is our institution’s primary mission?
•
What are we known for at the current time? And what do we want to be
known for in the next five years? The next 10 years?
•
What are the strengths of our mature faculty? Of our young faculty?
What students are we planning to serve?
To what societal needs and goals is our institution attempting to respond?
What life goals are most of our students working to achieve?
What programs and services comprise our primary mission? For whom?
What type of learning experiences are our students searching for? And
what types of learning experiences do we want to provide?
If an institution is in the planning cycle for programs in online and distance
learning, the institutional design process includes questions such as the following.
Institutional questions focusing on online and distance courses:
•
What is the institution’s catalyst for offering online and distance courses?
Or for modifying current programs to include online components?
•
Is our primary or secondary student population requesting these kinds of
courses and programs? Or this type of online interaction?
•
Are online and distance programs part of a longer term strategic positioning
of our institution? Is this where we want to be with one-two degree
programs? Or many?
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Design Levels for Distance and Online Learning
27
•
What changes in our infrastructure are needed to match our desired
services, programs and students?
•
Does our institution have any special core competencies, resources, or
missions that are unique regionally or nationally that might form the basis
for unique and specialized online and distance programming?
Some primarily traditional institutions have successfully expanded beyond their
current “branding” with online and distance learning. Penn State, for example,
launched their World Campus Project in 1997, building on their expertise with
their extensive distance learning outreach programs. Another well-established
distance-education provider, the University of Maryland University College
(UMUC) is now a leader in online learning, as well. As of mid-2002, UMUC was
offering 15 bachelor’s and 17 master’s degrees fully online, as well as almost 50
online certificate programs. The University of Florida has been successful with
professional degree offerings, combining synchronous and asynchronous course
experiences with mentors at various physical locations (Riffee, 2003). For
institutions with experience in offering distance programs, going “online” has
meant adapting current processes and programs to new media, and to new
applications for interactions.
Other institutions that are launching themselves as only online or distance
institutions include Capella University, and Jones International University. This
is a more difficult task. Many institutions launched as virtual for-profit institutions
were launched with great fanfare and money and then quietly closed (Arnone,
2002; Blumenstyk, 2001; Boettcher, 2002).
Meanwhile, the Open University of the United Kingdom, a large, single-mode
institution launched in the early 1960s, is rapidly expanding the number of courses
with online components for delivery in the UK and elsewhere. And the number
of students accessing information via the Internet is growing rapidly.
A guiding principle emerging from these institutional efforts is a solid business
principle of staying close to your core competencies, which also means designing
to your strengths. Let’s take a closer look at how the Open University is
strategically well integrated — balancing its mission, vision, planning, development and services.
Open University System Model — Institutional Design Example
The Open University in the UK is well known for its very successful distance
learning programming which now reaches over 200,000 students, representing
35% of all part-time higher education students in the UK (http://www.open.ac.uk/).
According to John S. Daniel (1999), the Open University owes much of its
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
28 Boettcher
success to a focus on the following elements of their teaching and learning
program:
•
•
•
•
Well-designed multimedia teaching materials
Personal academic support for each student
Efficient logistics
Faculty who also conduct research
These four characteristics reflect the priorities and goals of the Open University.
These goals influence the design of their institutional structure, their faculty and
staff, and their institutional priorities. The Open University invests heavily — by
virtue of faculty, developers and time in the design and development of effective
multimedia teaching materials. Their system of Associate Lecturers (tutors)
includes a program of substantial and extensive preparation for the tutors.
Evaluation of courses, materials and tutors are part of every course and program.
To ensure students are well supported, help is available 12 hours a day, every
day. And to ensure the continued development of effective materials, faculty
conduct research into learning that “continues to enhance the excellence of
teaching materials” (OU Strategic Plan, 2002-2012).
The Open University has apparently been successful with their focus on
developing excellent materials, logistics and support. “External assessment of
Open University teaching standards has awarded ‘excellent’ ratings to 18 of the
25 subjects assessed at the end of 2001.”
The principle that this example demonstrates is that all components of an
institution should reflect the vision and the mission of that institution. A good
overall guiding question for creating strategic plans for institutions and for
evaluating initiatives is, “Does this service, program, or initiative support the
overall mission and overall vision of our institution?”
This question is helpful for transitioning our thinking to the design level for the
infrastructure. People often think that buildings, classrooms, Web applications,
communication services and servers are neutral as far as having an effect on
teaching and learning. Nothing could be more misleading.
Level Two: Infrastructure Design
Design of the infrastructure includes design of all the elements of the environment that impact the teaching and learning experiences of faculty and students
and the staff supporting these experiences.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Design Levels for Distance and Online Learning
29
It includes design of the following:
•
•
Student services, faculty services, and learning resources
•
Design of physical spaces for program launching events, hands-on, lab or
network gathering events, and also celebratory graduation events
Design of administrative services, including admission processes, financial
processes and institutional community life events
Physical and Digital Plants
Infrastructure design for online and distance teaching and learning programs
focuses on the design of the Internet and Web infrastructure. A useful way to
think about the online infrastructure is to think in terms of analogs to the
traditional elements of physical plants on campuses. For example, infrastructures for online learning have offices, classrooms, libraries, and gathering spaces
for the delivery and management of learning and teaching. However, these
offices and classrooms are accessed through Web services, rather than through
physical buildings.
The good news about online infrastructures is that they support an unparalleled
new responsiveness, feedback, and access for learning activities. For example,
e-mail is definitely speedier and more satisfying than mail or phone tag. The bad
news is that the “online campus” — just like the traditional campus — depends
on a complex, costly, ever expanding “online campus” resource. The need for
new administrative structures and processes now involves more efficient
networks, servers, applications, and services. Expectations of speedy and
accurate 24 hours a day/seven days a week (24/7) response is growing almost
as fast as the technologies are growing.
Certainly expectations are growing faster than people can change and adapt the
services. Expectations of faculty response have reached the point where some
institutions are instituting policies that a faculty member will respond to e-mail
within 24 or 48 hours during the normal workweek. This type of requirement can
impose significant changes in faculty work habits and research focuses.
After almost 10 years of building online campuses, we now know that a “digital
plant” infrastructure is needed to support the new flexible online and distance
environments. We know that this new digital plant needs to be designed, built,
planned, maintained, and staffed. The infrastructure to support the new programs cannot be done with what some have called “budget dust” (McCredie,
2000). It is not nearly as easy or inexpensive as we all first thought. Some gurus
suggest that a full implementation of a plan for technology support on campus
“costs about the same as support of a library — approximately 5% of the
education and general budget” (Brown, 2000).
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
30 Boettcher
Components of a Digital Infrastructure
What exactly is a digital plant infrastructure? One way of describing this
infrastructure is to think of it in four major categories of software, hardware and
people. These categories are:
•
•
Personal communication tools and applications,
•
Dedicated servers and software applications that manage campus services. (Remember that servers are just specialized computers dedicated to
“serving” or providing focused services.) These servers support Web
services, such as in-going and outgoing mail, web sites, Web applications,
campus directories, program and course management systems, administrative services such as financial, student services, and human resources, and
the new e-commerce servers, and
•
Software applications and services from external providers, such as
research and library services, some of which are licensed to the institutional
community, Internet services, and out-sourced services, such as network
services, etc.
A network that provides access to Web applications and resources and
access to remote, national and global networks,
None of these systems work without people to manage them, so a key component
of the digital infrastructure is the group of individuals who make the systems
work. Figure 2 shows the people at the center of this infrastructure (Boettcher
and Kumar, 2000).
Higher education institutions have been designing and building digital infrastructures for teaching, learning and research since the early 1990s. (The building of
networks for communications goes back to the early 1980s.) The period of design
and development of these teaching and learning digital infrastructures is now
well into its second and even third generation. Internet2, a consortium of 202
universities working in partnership with industry and government, is leading work
on the next generation of advanced networks and applications (see http://
www.internet2.edu/).
Some of the questions that might be used to guide the development of the digital
infrastructure are listed below. The first set of questions addresses infrastructure design questions for long-term planning. These design questions are part of
the strategic planning processes and are addressed in collaboration with institutional planning groups. The next set of questions maps to the four categories of
the digital plant.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Design Levels for Distance and Online Learning
31
Figure 2. Teaching and Learning Infrastructure — “Digital Plant”
Network hardware and
software: Intranets and
links to global networks
Content and data providers,
such as ISPs, databases
plus free and shared
content resources
Application services, Web
servers, mail servers,
directory servers, etc.
People
Personal computing tools
and software
Institutional Infrastructure Level Questions for Long-Term Planning
•
•
What are our current institutional infrastructure strengths? Weaknesses?
•
Is the infrastructure scalable? Can it accommodate our expected growth
targets?
•
Is the infrastructure reliable? Are backups and alternative resources in
place to support mission-critical applications and services?
•
Is the infrastructure secure enough for our needs and services?
What changes in our infrastructure are needed to provide existing needs
and to plan for future services, programs and students?
Infrastructure Questions Mapping to Four Categories of Digital Plant
Personal communication tools and applications:
•
What are the tools that we expect each of our students to own or to have
access to? Do we expect students all to be proficient at word processing?
At e-mail? At Web applications? At researching on the Web? At using
collaborative tools? At using one or more course management systems?
•
•
Will all students have their own computer? Their own laptop?
How many hours a week do we expect students to be working “online”?
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
32 Boettcher
•
•
How often and when do we expect students to require technical support?
•
How will faculty and staff become proficient at the use of the systems?
How often and when do we expect faculty and staff to require technical
support? What type of support will they need?
Networks that provide access to Web applications and resources and to
remote, national and global networks:
•
What physical networks are needed to support Web applications, such as
e-mail servers, directory servers and Web application services?
•
•
•
Do we need or want wireless services in any of the physical spaces?
What speed will be needed for which services?
How often will the higher bandwidths be needed? Will higher bandwidth
services be needed for video conferencing for programs? For meetings?
For downloading large files? For streaming video?
Dedicated servers and software applications that manage campus services:
•
What types of interactive Web services will be provided? What hardware
and software will be required?
•
•
•
What type of course or learning management system will we use?
•
•
Will a portal approach be used?
•
•
How will these applications and servers be secured?
What type of administrative systems will we use?
Which group/organization will design/develop the Web presence for the
institution?
What do we need to do to assure student, faculty and staff accessibility, and
self-service from anywhere at anytime?
What type of authentication mechanisms will be used?
Software applications and services from external providers, such as
research and library services that are licensed to the institutional
community, Internet services, and out-sourced services, such as network services:
•
•
What licensed services are required and desired?
How will research and access to resources be provided?
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Design Levels for Distance and Online Learning
•
•
33
What services are to be available through consortia, etc.?
What budget is required to support these services currently and into the
future?
Technology decisions for students have always been part of the planning design
process for distance learning and, obviously, they are even more important today.
A comforting way of thinking about the technology for the infrastructure design
level is in terms of the generations of technologies used in distance learning
(Sherron and Boettcher, 1997). Distance learning was made possible with the
widespread availability of technologies, such as the mail, radio, telephone,
television, and audio and videocassettes. In the 21st century we simply have more
technology and more choices. But, as noted before, expectations of service
seems to be growing faster than the technology implementations.
Before moving on to the design questions at the program and course levels, a
brief note about change might be useful.
Role of Change in the Institutional and Infrastructure Design Levels
The design processes at the institutional and infrastructure design levels inevitably create expectations about how to manage institutional change that may
result from the design planning process. Implementing any institutional or
infrastructure design plan often means a realignment of priorities and changes
in processes. A body of change literature is available to help with the process
of design and the communication and community-wide activities to support
change. Two articles are particularly to be recommended for dealing with
strategic planning, goal setting and change management (Kaufman and Lick,
2000; Lick and Kaufman, 2000).
Now let’s look at the design of programs and courses. Design issues at these
levels are principally the responsibility of the institutional academic leadership,
assuming that the infrastructure design is in place.
Level Three: Program Design
Design at the program level is basically curriculum design and focuses on which
degrees, programs, and certificates are to be offered to students in the online or
distance environment. Online and distance learners generally are interested in
achieving or completing an instructional goal that can assist in their current or
future career path. The expectations of the use of online programs for lifelong
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
34 Boettcher
learning for leisure and personal interest will probably emerge over the next
decade or so, but the majority of online learners want a program of learning that
supports their career goals. At Florida State University in the mid-90s, one of the
foremost recommendations of an institutional distance learning committee was
to launch new online degree programs. That committee recommended investment in degree programs, such as master’s degrees in Information Studies,
Social Work, Communications, and Criminal Justice.
At the program level of design, instructional planners answer questions about the
type of program to be offered, to whom, and over what period of time and at what
cost. While teaching seminars on designing and developing online and distance
programs, it was satisfying to see how relieved the seminar participants generally
were to learn the importance of focus, pilots, and phased implementations. Some
participants have come to such seminars with instructions to “find out how to put
all the college programs online!” Participants left the seminar generally pleased
with two recommendations: (1) Focus on those programs where they had core
competencies and strengths; and (2) Plan a phased approach, gaining experience
in delivering programs in one or two areas before launching into many others.
As mentioned before, the design of every program should include a business and
marketing needs analysis. Before launching a distance learning degree program,
administrators like to be assured that there is a market for that particular
program. The fully online institutions, such as Capella University and Jones
International University, initially focused on programs offering master’s degrees
for working professionals in areas such as business, business communications,
education and information systems, and then branched out to undergraduate
completion programs in these same areas. Both of these institutions are fully
accredited by the Higher Learning Commission, a member of the North Central
Association, an accrediting body for institutions of higher education in the United
States.
Program level planning questions:
The first set of decisions for program planning can be guided by the following sets
of questions.
Curriculum questions:
•
What is the degree or certificate program to be offered online? Will it be
a full master’s degree (10 to 16 courses), an undergraduate minor (four to
six courses) or a certificate program (two to four courses)?
•
Which college or department will be offering the program?
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Design Levels for Distance and Online Learning
35
•
Is the program currently being offered in a traditional distance or campus
format, or is the program a new degree or certificate development effort?
•
What types of courses are envisioned? Will these courses be a fully
developed “course in a box” with a minimal amount of interaction or a highly
interactive and collaborative course requiring or using many online resources and applications? Will the courses be Web courses, Web-centric
courses, or Web-enhanced courses? (Boettcher, 1999)
Design and development questions:
•
Who are the faculty who will design, develop and deliver the courses in the
program?
•
Who will lead the effort to develop the degree or certificate program for
online or distance delivery? Will there be a project manager? (This is highly
recommended.)
•
What course management system or similar Web tool will be used for the
course management? What tools will be available and supported for the
interaction and collaboration activities?
•
•
What types of teaching and learning strategies will we use?
•
Which organization will be marketing the program? What is the schedule
for the design and development of marketing materials?
•
What resources and tools are envisioned for the library and research
materials?
•
What is the relationship between the academic developers and the technical
support personnel?
What is the schedule for design and development? What is the schedule for
the delivery of courses?
Faculty questions:
•
What training will be available to faculty as they transition to online teaching
and learning programs?
•
•
•
What tools and resources will be available to faculty?
•
Will faculty have any released time or budget for teaching and learning
resources in this new environment?
What tools and resources will faculty be expected to use?
What support will be available to faculty, especially for the delivery of the
first one or two courses?
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
36 Boettcher
Student questions:
•
Who are the students who will enroll in this course of study? How will we
find them and market the program to them?
•
•
What will our students bring to the program experience?
•
Where will the students be doing their learning? What level of network
access is required or recommended?
What tools and resources will the student in this program or certificate
program require or be likely to use?
This list of questions is intended as a catalyst for a college or department. As
the process gets underway, many more questions will emerge that will be specific
to the campus/institutional environment and culture.
ACTIONS Planning Model (Bates)
In this area of rapid technology development, an essential early question at the
program level of design is just what set of technologies faculty and students will
be using for their teaching and learning experiences? A planning framework for
student technologies was proposed by Tony Bates, one of the founding members
of the Open University staff in the United Kingdom in early 1990s (Bates, 1995).
The ACTIONS acronym is an easy way to remember the key elements of the
decisions for technologies. It is not only useful, but also highly recommended that
this framework also be applied to the faculty who will be teaching and learning
with the students in these programs.
The ACTIONS model provides a practical decision-making framework for
identifying and selecting the set of technologies to which students can be
assumed to have access during the course of a program. These questions can
effectively be used at the beginning of the design of a program, and also as a
checkpoint during the development process. The seven questions are below,
with updated annotations.
(A) Access: How accessible is the technology for the students?
The question of technology access was particularly important in the mid-1990s,
when technology access by students was relatively modest. Now, students are
very likely to have sufficient communications access and technologies and may
be even more skilled at their use than faculty. Thus, the question has become
which set of technologies is important and what is the expected number of hours
of use and the speed of access to be recommended. The latest data from the
Campus Computing Study of 2002 suggests that more than 75% of all students
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Design Levels for Distance and Online Learning
37
own their own desktop or notebook computer (Green, 2002). For online and
distant programs, this figure is probably higher, as learners often have access at
work, or shared access at home. If all students have their own computers and
access to the Web, faculty/mentors and support staff can assume easy convenient access and often unlimited access to networks and services. This type of
access greatly impacts the design of requirements, communication activities, and
course activities and experiences.
(C) Costs: What is the cost structure of the technology?
Any assumed technology needs to be affordable for the three partners in a
teaching and learning experience — the faculty, students, and institution. This is
where the question of support and infrastructure needs intersect in design.
Support for specific applications and tools needs to be considered in some detail.
(T) Teaching and learning: What kinds of teaching and learning experiences are required for the program goals?
The types of goals and objectives and the types of learning activities should be
appropriate for the speed and convenience of access, as well as for the life style
and learning styles of students and faculty.
(I) Interactivity and user-friendliness: What kind of interactivity is enabled? How easy is it to use?
Interaction between faculty and students, among students and between students
and learning resources is fundamental to the dialogue nature of effective and
enjoyable learning. The set of technologies that are selected and supported
should be easy, friendly, and intuitive.
(O) Organizational issues: What are the organizational requirements and
barriers to success?
Delivering degrees, programs, and courses to students online and in distance
environments requires a supportive, always-on, reliable, and secure digital
infrastructure. Systems and processes should be in place to recruit, admit,
support, evaluate, advise students, and provide access to library resources.
These support structures are critical to student learning and for faculty services.
(N) Novelty: How new is this technology?
Technology that is too new is often difficult to deploy and support effectively. So
new technologies are best introduced in pilot modes within established contexts.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
38 Boettcher
It is tempting to be ultra-conservative in the use of media, but older technologies
and media bring their own set of serious support challenges.
The importance of the decision as to which set of media and technologies to use
has been greatly oversimplified by the widespread availability of the Web.
Design decisions still should weigh assumptions as to network speed and the
ability to use Web tools, as well as audio, video and multimedia technologies.
However, it is also true, that by the time a course is deployed, technology tools
and environments can change as well. So the question is not what is the level of
knowledge and access available today, but what is the level of knowledge and
access likely to be when the course is delivered to a specific target population?
(S) Speed: How quickly can the courses be developed and delivered?
Quality courses can take a significant amount of time to design and develop.
Development of a complete online or distance course can easily take 18 to 30
months by a team of faculty developers, even with the better tools that are now
available. On the other hand, adding Web components to existing distance
courses can be designed and developed more quickly. How quickly can a course
be developed and delivered? It depends on the design decisions that are made
(Boettcher, 2000).
Another piece of good news for developing courses is that there is now a rich
body of content available in digital format. The tools for identifying, selecting,
organizing, and structuring content are also rapidly evolving. The time to prepare
for course delivery has the potential of improving if existing digital content can
be redirected toward instructional experiences. Some of the coming design
challenges are to improve the cost/benefit ratio and the “fitting”-ness of the
instructional program to the whole person.
Faculty Technologies and Support Needs
Faculty also require support in adapting to the new online and distance environments. When planning for faculty support needs and training, institutions may
find the following survey of interest. An informal Web survey in the Fall of 1999
asked faculty development personnel at 20 universities to identify the top three
issues that their faculty were facing in the development of their digital teaching
and learning infrastructure. The six most frequently cited issues were: (1) the
need for institutional support for the use of the new teaching and learning tools
and services; (2) support for planning the new teaching and learning experiences
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Design Levels for Distance and Online Learning
39
online; (3) faculty training; (4) funds; (5) governance; and (6) a concern for
quality.
The survey also asked which services faculty most frequently requested. These
results were both surprising and insightful. Faculty were asking for help in what
we now call “course life-cycling” for Web content. They were also asking for
help in: (1) course creation planning; (2) developing of courses; and (3) managing
the delivery of Web courses. Also mentioned were help in archiving and data
mining of courses that had already been delivered.
Faculty also expressed a desire for more support for learning general productivity software applications and for learning course management and development
tools, such as mailing lists, spreadsheets, and integrating video components into
their Web courses. Finally, faculty frequently mentioned support for students.
Just as faculty require support for shifting their teaching and learning habits,
many students, especially if they are more than 30, grew up after the digital
convergence. Such students have ingrained habits from the traditional campus
teaching and learning models.
Course Design — Level Four
Now let’s look at the level of design at the course level. This is the level that is
assumed to be the total responsibility of the faculty member. Is that assumption
true for the design of online and distance courses?
In online and distance courses, the independent or stand-alone course is the
exception, rather than the rule. Most online and distance courses are part of a
curriculum, program, certificate or degree program. This means that course level
design occurs within the context of the larger degree or certificate program and
probably in collaboration with other faculty and the academic department.
The downside of this contextual dependency is that design is likely to be more
complex, as it is a team effort, rather than an individual effort. Design is also more
likely to be “unbundled” from the development phase of the planning cycle. This
is good, but presents a different process from the bundled approach. The benefits
of this dependency means that the course design process is collaborative and that
faculty can benefit from the design work at the program or degree level. The set
of technologies and assumptions made at the program and infrastructure level
will likely be similar to those at the course level. The same is true for the Web
applications, and the interactive and collaborative tools that a course will use,
including the database or sources of resources to be used. All of these types of
course design questions are typically completed in the context of the infrastructure discussed earlier.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
40 Boettcher
What design decisions should be made by the course designer in the online and
distance environment? The course designer is primarily responsible for questions on the course content, objectives, student goals, learning experiences, and
assessment for a particular course. Many of these questions parallel questions
at the program level design.
Course questions:
•
Where does this course fit within the context of the degree or certificate
program to be offered online? Is it an early course focused on discipline
concepts, peer discussions, and standard problems or a later course
focusing on applications and complex scenarios?
•
What is the core set of knowledge, skills, and attitudes/values expected to
be acquired by the students in this course?
•
Is this course currently being offered in face-to-face or distance mode now,
or will this be a new development effort?
•
What types of learning activities are envisioned? Will students be learning
concept-dense content or discussing and solving problems collaboratively?
Or both? Are the learning strategies specifically recommended and suited
to these goals for this content?
•
What tools will students need for completing the learning experiences
designed for the course?
•
What is the set of content resources required for this course? Recommended for this course? What content resources will students use to
customize the learning experience for their needs and state of knowledge
and desire?
•
Will students be a cohesive cohort group? Or will the students in every class
generally be new to one another?
•
Will students be familiar with all the technologies, tools, and data resources? Are there tools or applications specifically recommended for the
content of this course?
Design and development questions:
•
What faculty member is the primary designer/deliverer of this course? Or,
is it a team of faculty members?
•
What faculty member will lead the effort to design, develop and then deliver
this course over time? Will it be one faculty member or a team?
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Design Levels for Distance and Online Learning
41
•
What course management system or similar Web tool will be used for the
content management? For the interaction and collaboration activities?
•
What is the schedule for design and development and delivery of this
course?
•
What resources and tools are envisioned for the library and research
materials?
Faculty questions:
•
What training will be available to faculty as they make a transition to online
teaching and learning programs?
•
•
•
What tools and resources will be available to faculty?
•
Will faculty have any released time or budget for teaching and learning
resources in this new environment?
•
What is the state of the faculty’s personal teaching and learning technology? What is the set of technologies and tools to be used by the faculty for
this course?
•
Will faculty have access to printers, databases, and cameras? Will faculty
need these tools?
•
What type of access to the network is recommended and available? Will
dial-up be sufficient, or will DSL or cable access be recommended or
required?
What tools and resources will faculty be expected to use?
What support will be available to faculty, especially for the delivery of the
first one or two courses?
Student questions:
•
Who are the students taking this course? What are their hopes and
expectations? What future courses will depend on the knowledge, skills and
attitudes acquired in this course?
•
What knowledge and expertise do the students bring to the course? What
is their zone of proximal development (Vygotsky, 1978)?
•
•
What life experiences will the students bring to the program experience?
What tools and resources will the students in this program or certificate
program require or be likely to use?
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
42 Boettcher
•
What types of teaching and learning strategies best suit the students in this
course? What are the life style and learning styles of the students?
•
When and where will the students be likely to gather for their collaborative
work? When and where will they do their more self-study activities?
•
Where will the students be doing their learning? What level of network
access is required or recommended?
While the number of design questions can seem overwhelming initially, much of
this design work at the course level is very familiar to faculty. Faculty are often
unconsciously competent at instructional design. They have often been practicing these skills for years, making preliminary assumptions about content,
students’ goals, students’ knowledge, and environments during an informal
course planning process and then refining it after meeting with a group of
students. The key difference in applying these skills to online and distance
learning is these courses are designed and developed in advance of meeting with
students and independent of any particular group of students. Thus, the more
intense design process. Good course design makes for effective learning by
students, effective teaching and mentoring by faculty, more satisfied students
and faculty, and overall positive faculty/student interactions and experiences.
Instructional design of complex learning for complex individuals is neither simple
nor straightforward. However, this set of instructional design questions can help
to create more effective and efficient learning experiences and environments.
The next two design levels are within the course parameters and generally are
the responsibility of the course faculty /mentor.
Level Five: Unit/Learning Activity
Design questions and strategies specific to the unit/learning activity level and the
assessment level are based on a Life Style and Learning Style Framework (LSTWO) and the four knowledge bases within the framework. This framework
focuses on integrating analyses of student life-style and learning styles into
instructional planning. The framework is grounded in four knowledge bases: (1)
traditional and current instructional design principles; (2) insights and principles
from current cognitive research; (3) the dynamic nature of content resources;
and (4) teaching and learning environments enabled by ubiquitous and mobile
computing.
The Life Style and Learning Style Design Framework (LS-TWO) integrates
traditional questions on program planning with individualized life and learning
styles. The design principles and questions derived from this framework include:
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Design Levels for Distance and Online Learning
43
(1) external planning and service characteristics from the institutional, infrastructure, and curriculum design levels and (2) planning for the internal cognitive
processes and knowledge construction by students.
Examples of cognitive learning style design questions include: “How do students
process information?”; “What do students construct in their minds when
challenged with new concepts and rich content structures?”; “What knowledge
do students bring to the learning experience?” and “What types of collaboration
activities support learning?”
Another unique characteristic of this framework is an emphasis on the life-style
(LS) of the learner. The life-style of the learner includes all the elements in a
learner’s current life situation. We often forget to consider the finer details of the
life environments of faculty and learners when designing learning experiences.
Where will the learner be working? Will they have a personal space where they
can control sound, temperature, disturbances, and network access? Will they
have to “ask” their family if they can use the phone line for 15 minutes or an hour?
The Life Style focus of the LS-TWO Design Framework encourages analysis of
the where, when, with whom, and with what resources the learner going to be
doing their learning work. This consists of constructing his/her own new
knowledge and applying knowledge and solving problems.
The array of new mobile, wireless technologies enables learners to study
anywhere at any time. Initially, the ability to study anywhere seemed to hold the
promise of solving many problems associated with access to learning. We have
not addressed the question of just when and just where this “anytime” is likely
to occur, however. Many of us do our teaching and learning “anywhile.” While
we are driving, while we are talking on the phone, while we are cooking, and
while we are talking to family — perhaps even while we should be sleeping or
spending time with the family. Time is a scarce commodity and is getting scarcer.
One of the foundations of the framework is traditional instructional design
integrated with Vygotsky’s learning theories. Let’s look at the primary principles
of Vygotsky’s theory and consider how instructional planning can benefit from
an integration of Vygotsky’s ideas with traditional design theory. We will then
see what principles and questions we can derive from this integration of ideas.
Vygotsky’s View of Teaching and Learning
There are at least three major concepts within Vygotsky’s theory that provide
principles for designing instruction. These concepts are:
•
Viewing the teaching and learning process as having four major components — learner, faculty mentor, problem or content to be learned and the
context for the teaching and learning experience
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
44 Boettcher
•
•
The concept of the zone of proximal development
The process path of concept development
Four Major Components of Teaching and Learning
Let’s start with the first major concept. Any structured learning experience has
four components — the learner (Le), the faculty mentor (M), the knowledge/skill
(K) or attitude to be learned, and the environment (E) in which the learning is to
take place. This view of the learning process provides an easily remembered
four-point checklist (LeMKE) for designing instructional experiences.
The Learner (Le) Variable
The learner as a key variable in instructional design is well acknowledged.
Instructional design asks questions about the learner, such as: what does the
learner know now and what does the learner bring to the experience (prior
knowledge, both accurate and inaccurate)? And what is it that the learner hopes
to learn or achieve by participating in the teaching and learning activity?
Traditional instructional design encourages a thoughtful analysis of learners and
an estimation of the student’s knowledge, but constraints often dictate that the
learner is viewed as a member of a population with many similar characteristics.
Knowing what we know about learners, i.e., that all learners are likely to “know
differently,” suggests that we design to a variety of backgrounds and expectations. In other words, designing for a variety of knowledge constructs and
accommodating a variety of content resources and activities.
Principles and questions for the learner:
What are some learner principles relating to life-style and learning style? What
are some of the questions that we want to ask about our learners’ state of
knowledge?
Learner Principle #1. Adult learners bring personalized/customized knowledge to the learning experience. They bring their particular and personal zone of
proximal development.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Design Levels for Distance and Online Learning
45
Questions:
•
How do we determine a learner’s zone of proximal development? What is
the learner ready to learn? What is already known? What is partially
known?
•
What knowledge base about this content or closely related content does the
student currently have?
•
What kinds of problems can students solve now? What kinds of problems
do we want students to be able to solve at the conclusion of the experience?
•
What instructional experiences will facilitate the constructive learning
work in a person’s brain?
•
What experiences can lead adults to contribute their perspective and
opinions?
Learner Principle #2. Adult learners are very constrained in terms of time.
Yet, learning takes time. Everything else being equal, more time spent on learning
tasks generally equates to more learning.
Questions:
•
•
•
What is it that learners want to know and need to know?
•
What type of application knowledge is required?
How do we customize/personalize the content?
What is the core conceptual knowledge to be learned? What are the best
set of tools and applications for learning the core conceptual knowledge?
Learner Principle #3. A learner’s life-style impacts that learner’s time on task
and focus.
Questions:
•
•
•
•
•
Where will the student be doing his/her learning? What time of day?
What tools will be readily at hand?
What resources for learning will be available?
When and where will the learner meet/interact with other learners?
What is the right mix of social interaction/learning for this learner?
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
46 Boettcher
Learner Principle #4. Adult learners bring personal and professional goals to
the learning experience.
Questions:
•
•
•
What instructional experiences can facilitate the reaching of the goals?
What is the best or preferred mix of learning experiences for a learner?
What types of activities and what types of problems do learners want to be
able to analyze and to solve? What do learners want to be competent at?
The Faculty Mentor (M) Variable
What about the faculty mentor variable in the teaching and learning experience?
The movement emphasizing learner-centered teaching suggests, I think, that we
need a new word for the human who structures, designs, leads, and supports
learning experiences. We seem to vacillate between terms, such as faculty,
teacher, guide, mentor, tutor, and coach — trying to accommodate the new
learning philosophies that it is the learner who is doing the learning. For this
document, the term faculty mentor has been used. (Combining designer and
mentor did not work, as it resulted in something like dementor.)
What is the role of the faculty mentor? What do they do? In the traditional
bundled model, faculty mentors design instruction at the level of the course.
Faculty mentors also develop and deliver the course. In traditional campus
models and in some online programs, it is the faculty mentor who defines the
parameters of a course, determines “what is to be learned,” and determines the
structure and content of the course. Faculty mentors write, select and assemble
materials and learning resources. They design, select, and present experiences
for the learner. The faculty mentor also manages the delivery of the course,
including the daily interactions with the students and assesses student learning.
In online and distance learning models, these roles are often unbundled into the
distinct roles of designers, developers, and tutors. Many distance learning and
online programs have two different faculty mentors: the faculty who is the
primary designer/developer of the content and the faculty member who serves
as the learning assistant or tutor who interacts online with students and who may
serve as the face-to-face contact for learning (Riffee, 2003).
Principles/questions for the faculty mentor:
Here are the key core principles for the faculty mentor and associated questions.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Design Levels for Distance and Online Learning
47
Faculty Mentor Principle #1. Faculty mentors have the responsibility of
designing and structuring the course experience for the learners.
Questions:
•
Is the faculty mentor experienced at the process of designing and structuring the course experience for the particular student group and environment?
•
What type of support might the faculty mentor require? Does the faculty
mentor have the tools, the knowledge, and the resources to design and
structure the course experience
•
How much of the course is prepackaged? How much is to be developed by
the faculty mentor?
Faculty Mentor Principle #2. Faculty mentors generally rely on a fairly small
set of familiar teaching and learning strategies.
Questions:
•
What are the teaching and learning strategies that are a good fit for the
content and for the knowledge, skills, and attitudes to be learned by the
students?
•
What are the types of learning experiences that best fit the learners and
best fit the knowledge and experience of the faculty mentor?
•
Are there other teaching and learning strategies that the faculty mentor
may want to develop for teaching this type of content?
Faculty Mentor Principle #3. Faculty mentors have a limited amount of time
for the design, development and delivery of a course. Can a quality course be
achieved within the constraints of time and support? Are there additional support
personnel?
Questions:
•
Where will the faculty mentor be meeting with the learners? How often?
How long will the online or face-to-face meetings be?
•
How much interaction is expected of the faculty mentor? How much
preparation? What are the tools for interaction and communication?
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
48 Boettcher
•
•
How will the faculty mentor interact with the institution providing credit?
•
What resources might be designed, developed, and used within a consortium?
What resources and tools will be available for the management of the
course?
The principle of limited time reminds us that just as time on task is an important
determinant in learning, time spent in interacting with students or monitoring a
student’s learning experience can be an important determinant in the quality of
the overall experience. Yet, time is a cost. This is only one of the challenges of
design. We have become accustomed to talking about a parent’s quality time
with children. Perhaps we should also become more aware of a faculty’s quality
time with students and the tools needed to support that quality interaction. A welldeveloped infrastructure that is easy for faculty to use can be a factor in
achieving quality time on task for both learners and faculty mentors.
The Knowledge (K), Skill, Attitude to be Learned or Problem to be
Solved Variable
In all learning theories, the task of learners is to acquire the knowledge, skill, and
attitudes that are needed or desired. Vygotsky’s theory leans towards the use of
what we now call problem-based learning (PBL). I think it is noteworthy that
many of the curricular innovations of the 1990s are based on problem-based
learning. The studio physics program designed by Jack Wilson at Renselaaer in
1990 is one of the better-known course redesign efforts based on PBL (Kolb,
2000). For instructional design purposes, the content of a course can be any or
all of the following: a body of knowledge and concepts to acquire, a set of skills
to be acquired and practiced, and attitudes and values towards the knowledge
and the skills.
The question of just what it is that we hope learners will take away from an
instructional experience is a question that may be changing soon. We may want
to divide the traditional instructional design question into two parts. Rather than
asking what content is to be learned, we may want to ask what knowledge needs
to be in the learner’s heads and what knowledge does the user need to be able
to find and to use external knowledge bases effectively?
This new design question also impacts the structure and types of content
resources. We now structure courses to deliver all the knowledge that a learner
might need, “just in case.” But, we are moving towards a “just in time” model.
We have seen this shift in manufacturing industries. The shift is coming for our
information-based professions, as well. Knowledge keeps growing, expanding
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Design Levels for Distance and Online Learning
49
— like the universe — and we can’t know everything. But, “everything” can be
quickly available. Thus, what is it that a child born in 2000 needs to learn to be
an effective 21st century adult?
Principles/questions for the knowledge/content variable:
What does the life style and learning style framework suggest we ask about the
content to be learned and about the problems to be solved for learners?
Knowledge Principle #1. All learners do not need to learn all content. All
learners do need to learn the core or base concepts and to develop useful
knowledge.
Questions:
•
What content resources will be available for the faculty and for the
students?
•
Will the core concepts and base concepts be available in a variety of media
and instructional experiences?
•
What experiences and what problems will enable learners to customize and
personalize content?
Knowledge Principle #2. Every learner has a zone of proximal development
that defines the space that a learner is ready to develop into useful knowledge.
Questions:
•
How do we create teaching and learning experiences that support learning
within the zone of proximal development for all learners?
•
•
How do we design experiences that lead to the creation of more ZPDs?
How do we determine/assess what development has occurred?
Knowledge Principle #3. Learners develop useful knowledge in context, in
situations similar to those that are meaningful to learners.
Questions:
•
What content resources are to be required, recommended and selected/or
customized for the student?
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
50 Boettcher
The Context or Environment (E) for Learning
In Vygotsky’s model, the environment for learning is a fundamental “actor” in
the process of learning. It is Vygotsky’s belief in the essential role of context and
environment in learning that probably resulted in his theory being characterized
as a theory of social development. While this is a true characterization to some
degree, his theory is more about the role of social interactions in the development
of cognition. His theory is an intellectually robust, holistic learning theory, based
on context and the interaction of the learner with the environment. In Vygotsky’s
world, the environment of learning includes the interaction with the faculty
mentor, with the learners’ peers, with the learning materials and resources, and
action and thought within the learner’s specific zone of proximal development.
The context of a learning experience for Vygotsky includes all physical aspects
and all mental aspects of an environment, the full socio-cultural-temporal
environment. When applying this theory to online and distance learning, this
means designing for the full range of physical and mental aspects of a learning
experience. Vygotsky’s theory is a reminder of the importance of designing for
the “where, when, with whom and with what resources” of a learning experience.
Principles/questions for the context/environment:
What principles and questions does the life-style and learning style framework
suggest be asked about the context and the environment of learning?
Environment/Context Principle #3.Every learning experience has a context
or an environment in which the learner works.
Questions:
•
Where, when, with whom and with what resources is a learner going to be
working?
•
Will a learner have choices of resources, choices of learning tools and
strategies?
•
When will a learner know that he/she knows? What feedback or result from
a problem being solved will make the learner’s knowledge evident?
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Design Levels for Distance and Online Learning
51
Level Six: Assessment
As mentioned in the instructional design principles, assessment is fundamental
to the design process. Assessment planning helps to balance the goals of the
effectiveness of learning and the efficiency of teaching and learning. However,
assessment is complex and challenging, particularly if we acknowledge the goals
of enriched student learning. In productive, customized, enriched learning
experiences, each learner begins with an existing, distinct base of knowledge
representation and enriches that knowledge base in distinct and individual ways.
Productive learning experiences mean that all students complete a learning
experience with an expanded, yet different, base of knowledge. The goal is that
learners learn core principles so that they can be effectively applied, but the
particular way the knowledge base is constructed in individuals is unique.
What we can design into instructional planning is that all learners share some of
the same experiences and that assessment focuses on the common learning that
is achieved. Assessment can also provide for demonstration of knowledge and
skills in more complex environments. How this is achieved in online and distance
learning requires creativity and flexibility beyond the usual types of assessments.
Given these few caveats, here are some questions that faculty mentors and
instructional planners can use as starting points for designing assessment.
Assessment Questions
•
How will the learners know the goals and objectives for the learning? It is
good to plan for core concepts, practice of core concepts, and customized
applications of concepts.
•
Will learners be generating a set of their own goals for learning? How will
the faculty mentor and learner communicate and agree on goals for
learning, particularly for customized applications of concepts?
•
Will learners have self-check or peer-check practice sessions on core
concepts?
•
•
•
How often will assessment be done? Will there be weekly expectations?
•
If we don’t see the students on a regular basis, can we design ways to
“see” their minds virtually through conversation and experiences?
In what ways and where will the students be evaluated and graded?
How will students demonstrate their competency in concept formation? In
solving problems?
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
52 Boettcher
This is only a brief beginning on designing and planning for assessment. Here are
two resources for following up with more ideas on designing for complex
learning. Alverno College in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, has focused on “ability
based education” since the 1960s. Their program is based on the concept of
“student assessment as learning.” It is an interesting approach that has included
portfolios, etc., for some time. Descriptions of their programs and their approach
to student assessment are at www.alverno.edu/educators/student_as_learn.html.
The portfolio projects within the National Learning Infrastructure Initiative
(NLII) are also useful in assessment of complex learning. (See http://
www.educause.edu/nlii/keythemes/eportfolios.asp.)
Design Questions for Future Planning
The design questions proposed for each of the six design levels focus primarily
on the components of the teaching and learning experience. Many external
trends and environmental factors are currently impacting the design of instruction, as well, but those are the focus of a future paper.
Summary of Design Levels
The process of the design of instructional planning is gaining respect as the
demand for effective and efficient learning grows. The demands are coming as
a result of time pressures, budget pressures and a general goal of accountability
in our society. We started with a set of design principles that reaffirmed that
design work is iterative, that the responsibility for design work is shared jointly
among the hierarchical groups of an institution and that instructional planning,
when done well, results in delighted and productive learners and faculty/mentors
pleased with their roles and their work. These types of outcomes argue
persuasively for this new focus on instructional design and planning.
Acknowledgments
With many thanks to Dr. Don Ely, Professor Emeritus at Syracuse University
and Dr. Dale Lick of Florida State University and other friends and colleagues
for their feedback on earlier drafts of this chapter.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Design Levels for Distance and Online Learning
53
References
Arnone, M. (2002). United States Open U. to close after spending $20-million.
Chronicle of Higher Education, (February 15), A44.
Bartlett, T. (2003). Take my chair (Please!). Chronicle of Higher Education.
(March 7), A36-38.
Bates, A. W. T. (1995). Technology, Open Learning and Distance Education. New York: Routledge.
Blumenstyk, G. (2001). Temple U. shuts down for-profit distance-education
company. Chronicle of Higher Education, (July 20), A29.
Boettcher, J. V. (1999, October). Another look at the tower of WWWebble.
Syllabus, 13(50), 52.
Boettcher, J. V. (2000). How much does it cost to put a course online? It all
depends. In M. J. Finkelstein, C. Frances, F. Jewett and B. W. Scholz
(Eds.), Dollars, Distance, and Online Education: The New Economics
of College Teaching and Learning (pp. 172-197). Phoenix, AZ: American Council on Education, Oryx Press.
Boettcher, J. V. and Kumar, V. M. S. (2000, June). The other infrastructure:
Distance education’s digital plant. Syllabus, (13), 14-22.
Boettcher, J. V. and Long, P. (2002). What’s next for teaching and learning
leveraging technology? Paper presented at the meeting of the National
Learning Infrastructure Initiative.
Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L. and Cocking, R. R. (1999). How People Learn.
Brain, Mind, Experience, and School. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Brown, D. G. (2000). Academic planning and technology. In J. V. Boettcher, M.
M. Doyle and R. W. Jensen (Eds.), Technology-Driven Planning:
Principles to Practice. Ann Arbor, MI: Society for College and University
Planning.
Bruner, J. S. (1963). The Process of Education. New York: Vintage Books.
Daniel, J. S. (1998). Knowledge media for global universities: Scaling up
new technology at the Open University. Paper presented at the meeting
of Seminars on Academic Computing, Snowmass, Colorado, USA.
Dewey, J. (1933). How We Think (1998 ed.). Boston, MA: Houghton-Mifflin.
Gagne, R. M. (1965). The Conditions of Learning. New York: Holt, Rinehart
& Winston.
Green, K. C. (2002). Campus computing, 2002. Encino, CA: The Campus
Computing Project, www.campuscomputing.net.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
54 Boettcher
Kaufman, R. and Lick, D. D. (2000). Mega-level strategic planning: Beyond
conventional wisdom. In J. V. Boettcher, M. M. Doyle and R. W. Jensen
(Eds.), Technology-Driven Planning: Principles to Practice. Ann Arbor, MI: Society for College and University Planning.
Kolb, J. E., Gabriele, G. A. and Roy, S. (2000). Cycles in curriculum planning.
In J. V. Boettcher, M. M. Doyle and R. W. Jensen (Eds.), TechnologyDriven Planning: Principles to Practice. Ann Arbor, MI: Society for
College and University Planning.
Lessig, L. (1999). Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace. New York: Basic
Books.
Lick, D. and Kaufman, R. (2000). Change creation: The rest of the planning
story. In J. V. Boettcher, M. M. Doyle and R. W. Jensen (Eds.),
Technology-Driven Planning: Principles to Practice. Ann Arbor, MI:
Society for College and University Planning.
Pinker, S. (1997). How the Mind Works. New York: W.W. Norton.
Riffee, W. H. (2003, February). Putting a faculty face on distance education
programs. Syllabus, (16), 10-14.
Sherron, G. T. and Boettcher, J. V. (1997). Distance learning: The shift to
interactivity. CAUSE Professional Paper Series #17. Retrieved March 6,
2003 from the World Wide Web: EDUCAUSE Publications Database.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Thought and Language. (E. Hanfmann and G. Vakar,
trans.) Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher
Psychological Processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
E-Moderating in Higher Education 55
Chapter III
E-Moderating in
Higher Education
Gilly Salmon
Open University Business School, United Kingdom
Abstract
There are few published reports of structured approaches to developing
lecturers for new online roles. However, both campus and distance
learning institutions can offer some experiences in developing lecturing
staff to moderate and teach with low cost text-based online conferencing.
This role is known as e-moderating. Staff development is often asserted as
a key issue in the success of everything from a project, a course or a whole
institution to an online environment. The current climate asserts the
importance both for university and college lecturers of adopting a good
practice and an understanding of teaching in addition to academic
competence. This chapter considers and explores the knowledge and skills
that the best e-moderators have and how they can be recruited, trained and
developed.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
56 Salmon
Introduction and Rationale
The challenge of developing new kinds of online teaching and learning processes,
whilst remaining true to educational or training missions, is at the forefront of the
implementation of information and communication technologies in the early 21st
century. Alexander, McKenzie et al. (1988) show that staff development is one
of the main factors in determining the success of institutional attempts to make
the transition to online delivery.
The term moderator has grown up with the use of online text-based discussion
and group work, in teaching and learning contexts. In 2000, I first used the term
“e-moderating” to capture the wide variety of roles and skills that the online
teacher, lecturer or trainer needs to acquire. Supporting learning online through
synchronous and asynchronous conferencing (bulletin boards, forums) requires
e-moderators to have a wider range of expertise compared to working with faceto-face learning groups. Hence, the role of the lecturer or teacher in higher
education needs to change to include e-moderating to match the development
and potential of new online environments.
Successful and productive e-moderating is a key feature of positive, scalable and
affordable e-learning projects and processes. Regardless of the sophistication
of the technology, online learners do not wish to do without their human
supporters. How many people, for example, have been heard to say, “I’m great
at art because of my inspirational computer?” Not any that I’ve met, on or offline! Instead, learners talk of challenge and support by their teachers or of
contact with the thoughts and the work of others. Most people also mention the
fun and companionship of working and learning together. Such benefits do not
have to be abandoned if developing online learning results in a cohort of trained
e-moderators to support the online learners.
Many words have been written about new technologies and their potential, but
not much about what the human supporters of the learning actually do online.
The greatest impact of all on the quality of the students’ learning resides in the
way a technology is used and not in the characteristics of the medium itself
(Inglis, Ling et al., 2000). Although increasing numbers of learners are working
online, few lecturers have themselves learned this way. Therefore, e-moderating is not a set of skills most lecturers have acquired vicariously through
observing teachers whilst they themselves were learning. Many lecturers
naturally believe that learning to e-moderate mostly has to do with learning new
software or computing skills. This is not the case. In text-based asynchronous
environments, a critically important role for the e-moderator is promoting the
surfacing and sharing of understanding and knowledge through online writing and
dialogue (Barker, 2002). Furthermore, successful e-moderating cannot be
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
E-Moderating in Higher Education 57
achieved by doing what lecturers always did in the classroom. As of yet, there
are few online mentors to guide them through step-by-step, nor is there time for
long-term apprenticeships. It follows that e-moderators must be specially
recruited, trained and developed.
Currently, e-moderating continues to be a labour-intensive service. The UK
Open University, for example, works to an average of 25 students per online
teaching discussion group. The for-profit University of Phoenix in the US
operates in learning groups of eight to 15 students, each with an online teacher.
This means that we are likely to witness a growth in demand for online teachers
in the next few years.
Definitions and Context
There are many definitions of an online course. These include classroom-based
teaching supplemented by lecture notes posted on a web site or by electronic
communication such as e-mail. At the other end of the spectrum, materials may
be made available and interactions occur exclusively through networked technologies. Currently, in the UK, completely online courses are rare. Most courses
are mixed mode or blended in some way.
I use the term online to mean teaching and learning which takes place over a
computer network of some kind (e.g., an intranet or the Internet) and in which
interaction between people is an important form of support for the learning
process. This rules out learning which is purely “resource-based,” e.g., learning
using some Web-based courseware without recourse to any kind of human
interaction. It includes both synchronous and asynchronous forms of interaction
and also interaction through text, video, audio and in shared virtual worlds
(Goodyear, Salmon et al., 2001). To date, text-based asynchronous computer
mediated conferencing or forums have been the most extensively used for
teaching and learning in higher education, both on and off campus, and hence I
concentrate especially on the roles of e-moderators in asynchronous networked
learning environments. Platforms most commonly in use include FirstClass,
Blackboard and WebCT, but there are a wide variety of others, including
commercial systems and those developed in-house.
E-moderating draws on aspects of both face-to-face teaching and traditional
print-based distance teaching. However, it also calls for the introduction of a
range of new understandings and techniques that are specific to online delivery.
The key factor in e-moderating is that the e-moderator operates for part of the
time in the electronic environment along with his or her students or learners.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
58 Salmon
Online teaching also requires an attitude change for teaching staff. Some
researchers argue this is nothing less than a major cultural change (Williams,
2002).
There are two main ways that lecturers in universities and colleges can be
developed to engage successfully in online teaching opportunities. One approach
is to enhance the technical knowledge of teaching staff to enable them directly
to design, develop and produce online materials and teach online with their
students. Some of the platforms in use, such as Blackboard, have been
developed to make these tasks as simple and as non-technical as possible.
However, a second and more common method is to take a specialist approach
to staff development. This involves increasing the skills of lecturers to focus on
the successful delivery of online teaching and facilitating and the support of
online students, usually in combination with their other (off-line) duties. This
means that other people also must be recruited, such as instructional designers,
graphic designers, computer technicians, multimedia programmers, audio-visual
technicians, editors of text, e-librarians and resource providers. (See Inglis, Ling
et al., 2000, for further exploration of these issues.)
Competencies and Skills for
E-Moderators
Goodyear, Salmon et al. (2001) detail the online teacher’s roles as follows:
1.
Process facilitator — facilitating the range of online activities that are
supportive of student learning.
2.
Adviser/counselor — working on an individual/private basis, offering
advice or counseling learners to help them get the most out of their
engagement in a course.
3.
Assessor — concerned with providing grades, feedback, validation of
learners’ work, etc.
4.
Researcher — concerned with engagement in production of new knowledge of relevance to the content areas being taught.
5.
Content facilitator — concerned directly with facilitating the learners’
growing understanding of course content.
6.
Technologist — concerned with making or helping to make technological
choices that improve the environment available to learners.
7.
Designer — concerned with designing worthwhile online learning tasks
(both “pre-course” and “in course”).
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
E-Moderating in Higher Education 59
8.
Manager/administrator — concerned with issues of learner registration,
security, record keeping, etc.
Of these, the most difficult to grasp and achieve are the process roles, e.g., one
to five. These are the roles that I call e-moderating.
I have analysed the qualities and characteristics of successful e-moderators —
the competencies they should acquire through training and experience (Salmon,
2002) (See Figure 1).
Recruiting Your E-Moderators
Given the required competencies, how do you set about acquiring the right emoderating staff? Most institutions face re-skilling experienced staff, or adding
e-moderation to training programmes for new teaching staff. Currently, it is most
unusual for lecturers or tutors to be recruited for e-moderating skills per se or
for their previous experience in teaching online. In the future, however, I predict
that there will be more specialisation, and some categories of staff will
demonstrate their particular aptitude for working online.
A long list of relevant teaching qualifications or experiences is unlikely to be
found at this stage of the development of online lecturers and trainers. The emoderators you recruit should, of course, be credible as members of the learning
community. I suggest that you try to recruit e-moderators with the qualities from
columns one and two of Figure 1, if possible. Teachers who have something of
a vision of the importance of online learning in the future and how to prepare
themselves to operate successfully and happily within such an environment are
those to be spotted and supported (Waeytens, Lens et al., 2002). However, at
the moment, there are very few such people available. I tend to select applicants
who show empathy and flexibility in working online, plus exhibit a willingness to
be trained as e-moderators. Before asking them to work online, you must train
them in the competencies described in columns three and four in Table 1. I would
expect e-moderators to have developed the skills in columns five and six by the
time they had been working online with their participants for about one year.
If lecturers or academics are used to being considered an “expert” in their
subject, the levelling effect and informality of online networking can be very
challenging for them. As e-moderators, they will probably have to work a little
harder to establish their credentials as an experienced professional in the online
environment, as opposed to being in a face-to-face group. Even those recruits
who are used to developing distance learning materials need to explore how
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Has personal experience as an
online learner, flexibility in
approaches to teaching &
learning. Empathy with the
challenges of becoming an
online learner.
Has operational understanding
of software in use reasonable
keyboard skills; able to read
fairly comfortably on screen,
good, regular, mobile access
to the Internet.
Provides courteous and
respectful in online (written)
communication, able to pace
and use time appropriately
Has knowledge and
experience to share,
willingness to add own
contributions.
Has determination and
motivation to become an emoderator.
Understanding of
online process
Technical skills
Online
communication
skills
Content expertise
Personal
E
characteristics
D
C
B
A
CONSTRUCTIVE
CONFIDENT
Characteristic
Is able to establish an
online identity as emoderator.
Is able to encourage
sound contributions from
others, know of useful
online resources for their
topic.
Is able to write concise,
energizing, personable
online messages.
Is able to appreciate the
basic structures of CMC,
and the WWW and
Internet’s potential for
learning.
Understands the potential
of online learning and
groups.
Is able to build online
trust and purpose for
others.
II
I
Quality/
RECRUIT
Is able to adapt to new
teaching contexts, methods,
audiences and roles.
Is able to trigger debates by
posing intriguing questions.
Is able to engage with
people online (not the
machine or the software),
responds to messages
appropriately, be
appropriately “visible”
online, elicit and manage
students’ expectations.
Know how to “scale up”
without consuming
inordinate amounts of
personal time, by using the
software productively.
Knows how to use special
features of software for emoderators, e.g., controlling,
weaving, archiving.
Has ability to develop and
enable others, act as
catalyst, foster discussion,
summarize, restate,
challenge, monitor
understanding and
misunderstanding, take
feedback.
DEVELOPMENTAL
III
TRAIN
Shows sensitivity to online
relationships and
communication.
Carries authority by
awarding marks fairly to
students for their
participation &
contributions.
Able to gradually increase
the number of learners dealt
with successfully online,
without huge amounts of
extra personal time
Is able to interact through email and conferencing and
achieve interaction between
others, be a role model.
Is able to use special
features of software to
explore learner’s use, e.g.,
message history.
Knows when to control
groups, when to let go, how
to bring in non-participants,
know how to pace
discussion and use time on
line, understand the fivestage scaffolding process
and how to use it.
FACILITATING
IV
Shows a positive
attitude, commitment
and enthusiasm for
online learning.
Knows about valuable
resources (e.g., on the
WWW) and refer
participants to them.
Is able to value diversity
with cultural sensitivity,
explore differences and
meanings.
Creates links between
CMC and other features
of learning programmes.
Can explore ideas,
develop arguments,
promote valuable
threads, close off
unproductive threads,
choose when to archive.
V
KNOWLEDGE
SHARING
DEVELOP
Knows how to create and
sustain a useful, relevant online
learning community.
Is able to enliven conferences
through use of multimedia and
electronic resources, able to
give creative feedback and
build on participants’ ideas.
Is able to communicate
comfortably without visual
cues, able to diagnose and
solve problems and
opportunities online, use
humour online, use and work
with emotion online, handle
conflict constructively.
Is able to use software facilities
to create and manipulate
conferences and to generate an
online learning environment,
able to use alternative software
and platforms.
Is able to use a range of
approaches from structured
activities (e-tivities) to free
wheeling discussions, and to
evaluate and judge success of
these.
CREATIVE
VI
60 Salmon
Figure 1. Table of E-Moderator Competencies (From Salmon, 2000)
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
E-Moderating in Higher Education 61
online materials can underpin and extend their teaching. It follows that emoderators will also need to develop good working relationships with librarians
who are rapidly transforming themselves into ICT resource providers. Understanding ICT resource provision is another aspect that can be checked out during
recruitment by asking, for example, about a favourite web site for their subject.
It is most important to look at the potential, as well as at the existing skills of
recruits. E-moderators will need to know about online communication, rather
than only learn the software. They will need to have the ability to provide support
and counseling through e-mail, as well as the creativity and flexibility to design
and adapt collaborative opportunities for differing purposes, individual and
organisational missions and needs. They must be able to work cross-culturally
and value diversity. They must be flexible in considering approaches to online
assessment, evaluation and achievement. They must understand the benefits of
online working and, hence, are able to act as resource guides and monitors.
Furthermore, they will have personal metacognitive and adaptable approaches
to learning and the ability to reflect and have input into overall course learning
processes. The following table suggests some questions to ask to establish such
potentials. Skills in a particular platform are unimportant at the recruitment
stage. These can be taught and retaught as needed.
To summarise, at the moment there are few people available with the skills I have
listed in Figure 1. Most newcomers to e-moderating are more familiar with
teaching face-to-face, where they rely perhaps on personal charisma to stimulate and hold their students’ interest. So what is most important in recruiting emoderators? The main enemy of operating successfully as an e-moderator in
asynchronous environments is time. Therefore, you need to look for people who
will not try to cover everything. But, instead look for those who have studentfocused strategies based on encouraging the students to change their view of the
world — strategies that are based on what the students do. E-moderator recruits
also need to be very organised. There is rarely the same opportunity to improvise
as there is in face-to-face teaching. I would consider the most essential skills
are empathy online and a flexible approach to working, teaching and learning
online. Any recruit will have to be willing to be trained and developed in the emoderating role. They will need good keyboarding skills and some experience of
using computers, including online networking. “Black and white thinkers” are
generally to be avoided. What you are recruiting for, to a large extent, is the
ability to adapt to technological and online environment changes, as well as to
operate successfully using current platforms. Look for people who have crosscultural sensitivity which includes the ability to handle ambiguity and multiple
viewpoints. However, given those requirements, good e-moderators come from
many different backgrounds, with very varied learning and teaching experiences. Where they live, their domestic or work commitments or any disabilities
that reduce their ability to travel are unimportant.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
62 Salmon
Training E-Moderators
Even if teachers have an excellent record in conventional settings, it is difficult
to predict who will do well in online teaching. Currently, few universities and
colleges offer much in the way of training for e-moderating skills and the best
methods are yet to be identified (Kearsley, 2000). However, the acquisition of
e-moderating skills cannot be achieved vicariously by lecturers observing other
online teachers or by looking at exemplary web sites. Enabling lecturers to use
technology in their teaching, means providing training that is motivating, attention
gaining, relevant and confidence building. A tall order, indeed!
Scaffolding: A Model of Online
Development
Figure 2 offers a model of teaching and learning online, researched and
developed with business school students and tutors in the Open University over
several years and since applied across many learning disciplines, contexts and
levels. This model can be used as a scaffold for training and developing emoderators. Scaffolding suggests a way of structuring online interaction and
collaboration, starting with recruitment of interest, establishing and maintaining
an orientation towards task-relevant goals, highlighting critical features that
might be overlooked, demonstrating how to achieve those goals and helping to
control frustration (Wood and Wood, 1996).
It is especially important to concentrate on the communicative aspects of the use
of the online learning platform (Monteith and Smith, 2001). Each level of the fivestage model involves somewhat different activities for the participants. What the
e-moderator does online, and how much, varies according to the purposes,
intentions, plans and hopes for online learning. There is growing evidence that
teachers benefit from a developmental approach to learning new techniques
(Cornford, 2002).
There are certain key stages in the progression of the trainee e-moderator. First,
there is a crucial understanding that gradually increasing the comfort of online
learners will increase participation and completion rates. Second, an appreciation develops that the design of online activities and interaction is as important
as sophisticated, but non-dynamic, design and delivery of content. Third, that the
evolving role of the e-moderator, who is much more than just a facilitator or
responder to questions, will make or break the experience for the learners.
Fourth, there is a recognition that there is considerable evidence that people
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
E-Moderating in Higher Education 63
become more independent and more responsible for their own development as
they move through the model, whether in structured or informal learning settings.
To date, most lecturers have acquired e-moderating skills through informal
networking and self-teaching, often in a situation of severe time poverty
(Bennett, 2002).
I will now outline the model, before going into detail. Facilitating individual
access is an essential prerequisite for conference participation (stage one, at the
base of the flight of steps). Stage two involves individual participants establishing
their online identities and then finding others with whom to interact. At stage
three, participants give and receive information freely to each other. Up to and
including stage three, a form of co-operation occurs, i.e., support by the online
group for each person’s goals. At stage four, course-related group discussions
occur and the interaction becomes more collaborative. The communication
depends on the establishment of common understandings. At stage five,
participants look for more benefits from the system to help them achieve
personal goals, explore how to integrate online learning into other forms of
learning and reflect on the learning processes.
Figure 2.(From Salmon, 2000)
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
64 Salmon
Each stage requires participants to master certain technical skills (shown in the
bottom left of each step). Each stage calls for different e-moderating skills
(shown on the right top of each step). The “interactivity bar” running along the
right of the flight of steps suggests the intensity of interactivity that you can
expect between the participants at each stage. At first, at stage one, they
interact only with one or two others. After stage two, the numbers of others with
whom they interact, as well as the frequency, gradually increases, although stage
five often results in a return to more individual pursuits.
Given appropriate technical support, an e-moderator, and a purpose for taking
part in online networking, nearly all participants will progress through these
stages of use in online learning. There will, however, be very different responses
in terms how much time they need at each stage before progressing. The model
applies to all online learning platforms. If experienced participants are introduced to software that is new to them, they will tend to linger for a while at stages
one or two, but then move on quite rapidly up the steps again.
The chief benefit of using the model to design development processes for emoderators is that there is a greater readiness by e-moderators, once trained, to
contribute to student learning online. E-moderators who understand the model
and apply it should enjoy online learning and find that their work runs smoothly.
They will spend much less time and achieve a more productive experience for
their students. If suitable technical and e-moderating help is given to participants
at each stage of the model, they are more likely to move up through the stages,
to arrive comfortably and happily at stages three through five. These stages are
the ones that are most productive and constructive for learning development
purposes.
Stage One: Access and Motivation
For e-moderators, being able to gain access quickly and easily to the online
learning system is one key issue at stage one. The other is being motivated to
spend time and effort.
The participant needs information and technical support to get online and strong
motivation and encouragement to put in the necessary time and effort. Like
learning any new piece of software, mastering the system seems fairly daunting
to start with. However, it is important to reassure lecturers that successful
achievement of e-moderation does not depend on previous computer literacy
(online networking often appeals to inexperienced computer users). At this
stage, computer skills will vary enormously. Use of e-mail is almost universal,
whereas competent, effective communication with it is not. And few people are
really skilled in using asynchronous groupware. Most people will be unfamiliar
with the tools you choose to use. However, many trainee e-moderators need
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
E-Moderating in Higher Education 65
some form of individual technical help at this stage, as well as general encouragement. Problems are often specific to a particular configuration of hardware,
software and network access or else related to the loss of a password. Access
to technical support needs to be available, probably through a telephone helpline,
particularly when the trainee is struggling to get online on his or her own.
However, it is a mistake to offer extensive face-to-face workshops to lecturers
in an attempt to enable them to feel more comfortable with the technology. They
need to develop these skills in the relevant context of their own teaching. The
simplest approach is to emulate the student experience for the lecturers, since
few of them have been online learners.
Another aspect of access is special needs of various kinds. In the spirit of wide
diversity and empowerment, it is good that the disabilities of users with special
needs are not usually obvious online. It is normally impossible to tell from the
messages in a conference that a participant or an e-moderator has restricted
vision or hearing or problems of mobility, unless that person wishes to volunteer
the information. People who have problems with their speech or hearing are not
at a disadvantage in text-based conferencing. However, those who have
problems with their vision or physical movement may well find that the keyboard
and screen prevent them from doing as much as they would like. Dyslexics still
have some difficulties online, even with electronic help available. It is very
important that trainee e-moderators understand the nature of special needs and
facilitate learning through the medium.
Strong motivation is a prime factor at this first stage, when participants have to
tackle the technical problems. Nearly all studies have shown that trainee emoderators are extremely resistant to insistence on their participation (Salmon,
2000; Collis and Moonen, 2001; Inglis, Ling et al., 2001), so carrots are much
more likely to be successful than sticks. No doubt, all staff will have heard horror
stories about the time required for e-moderation processes. So they need
reassurance, training and clear agreements about the time required from them.
Stage Two: Online Socialisation
In stage two, participants get used to being in the new online environment. Many
of the benefits of online learning in education and training flow from building an
online community of people who work together at common tasks.
Stage two is a critical stage and cannot be left out. It provides the motivation and
creates the important building blocks of professional development. Networked
learning offers the “affordance” of online socialising. Affordance means that
the technology enables or creates the opportunity (Gaver, 1996). In the case of
online conferencing, it has an inherent social component, as well as the ability to
convey feelings and build relationships. However, online learning will not in itself
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
66 Salmon
create social interaction. Sensitive and appropriate online conference design and
the intervening support of more experienced e-moderators will cause the
socialisation to occur. It is essential to offer trainee e-moderators the experience
of working online with others.
A sense of continuity, a connectedness with time and place, and a connectedness
with others contribute to online socialising. Our own internalised set of instructions for how to behave and how to make judgements, for feeling comfortable
together and “at home in one’s world,” and the reassurance of the familiar —
these all help enable us to find our roots in the social world. When online teaching
fragments and expands this sense of time and place, the usual pillars of wellbeing may be less available. There is evidence at stage two that all trainee emoderators struggle to find their sense of time and place in the online environment. Hence, the importance of enabling induction into online learning to take
place with support and in an explicitly targeted way.
Stage two participants recognise the need to identify with each other, to develop
a sense of direction online and they need some guide to judgement and behaviour.
A wide range of responses occurs. Some are initially reluctant to commit
themselves fully to public participation in conferencing, and should be encouraged to read and enjoy other’s contributions to the conferences for a short while,
before taking the plunge and posting their own messages. This behaviour is
sometimes known as “lurking,” although the term can cause offence! “Browsing” or “vicarious learning” are perhaps safer words. Browsing appears to be
a natural and normal part of socialisation into online learning and should,
therefore, be encouraged for a while as a first step. When participants feel at
home with the online culture, and reasonably comfortable with the technology,
they move on to contributing. E-moderators really do have to learn to use their
skills to ensure that participants develop a sense of community in the medium.
O’Brien tells us, from nursing education online, that integration of beliefs and
practices of individuals from all social and cultural groups in society is very
important for professional development (1998). This is applicable for all online
groups, especially as we teach and learn in increasingly international communities. The idea is simply that we should encourage participants to identify and
share their own beliefs and values, and acknowledge that they are different from
those of others.
Stage Three: Information Exchange
A key characteristic of online learning is that the system provides all participants
with access to information in the same way. At stage three, participants start
to appreciate the broad range of information available online. Information
exchanges flow very freely since the “cost” of responding to a request for
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
E-Moderating in Higher Education 67
information is quite low. In my experience, participants become excited, even
joyful, about the immediate access and fast information exchange. They also
show consternation at the volume of information suddenly becoming available.
E-moderators can be helped to become independent, confident, and enthusiastic
about working online at this stage. Trainee e-moderators need to know how to
exchange information in online conferences and forums. Information exchange
proficiency is essential before they move on to full-scale interaction in stage four.
Demands for help can be considerable because their experience in searching and
selection may still be low. There can be many queries about where to find one
thing or another online.
In summary, trainee e-moderators develop a variety of strategies to deal with the
potential information overload at this stage. Some do not try to read all messages.
Some remove themselves from conferences of little or no interest to them, and
save or download others. Others try to read everything and spend considerable
time happily online, responding where appropriate. Yet, others try to read
everything, but rarely respond. These participants sometimes become irritated
and frustrated. They may even disappear offline.
Stage Four: Knowledge Construction
Familiarity with the technology must be achieved by this stage. If familiarity is
not achieved, then it will only provide a distraction from the much more
demanding experience of learning and development in unknown territory and the
relationships that now develop. At this stage, trainee e-moderators will become
very interested in like-minded communities that are available to them online,
especially those from their own areas of interest or disciplines.
The issues that can be dealt with best at this stage are those that have no one right
or obvious answers, or ones that participants need to make sense of, or a series
of ideas or challenges. These issues are likely to be strategic, problem, or
practice-based ones. Most importantly, the development of tacit knowledge and
its impact on practice can be very strong at this stage, and especially important
in practice-based or clinical-based learning, such as management or medicine.
Developing advanced skills in e-moderating is important at this stage. The best
e-moderators demonstrate online the highest levels of tutoring skills related to
building and sustaining groups. Feenberg (1989) coined the term “weaving” to
describe the flow of discussion and how it can be pulled together. Online learning
makes weaving easier to promote than learning in face-to-face groups, since
everything that has been “said” is available in the conference text. The best emoderators undertake the “weaving.” They pull together the participants’
contributions by, for example, collecting statements and relating them to con-
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
68 Salmon
cepts and theories from the course. They enable the development of ideas
through discussion and collaboration. They summarise from time to time, span
wide-ranging views and provide new topics when discussions founder. They
stimulate fresh strands of thought, introduce new themes and suggest alternative
approaches. In doing all this work, their techniques for sharing good practice and
for facilitating the processes become critical.
Trainee e-moderators need to learn how to add value to the online discussion
forum or conference contributions at level four. First, the contributor needs to
be acknowledged in order to be “heard.” Secondly, online contributions will be
recorded, made available for others to read and become a form of inventory. The
e-moderator’s role is that of a recorder creating the inventory to be surfaced and
used by others. In a collective conference, personal “reflections” may be
responded to in various ways. One person may need more time to explore issues,
while another may reach conclusions quickly and then become impatient with
those who are still thinking. It is important that the e-moderator avoids the
temptation to discount the experience in any way or to counter it and enter into
argument. Instead, he or she can draw on the evidence that is presented to try
and explore overall conclusions. Thirdly, the e-moderator should comment at an
appropriate moment on the sufficiency of the data being presented and, fourthly,
on the quality of the argument around it. These ways ensure that the experiences, whilst valued, are not necessarily considered complete in themselves.
The e-moderator is thereby modelling ways of exploring and developing arguments.
The locus of power in more formal learning relationships is very much with the
tutor, lecturer or academic expert. In online learning at stage four, however,
there is much less of a hierarchy and greater potential for individual responsibility
for development.
Stage Five: Development
In higher education, e-moderators need to be able to engage in reflective practice
themselves (Orsini-Jones and Davidson, 1999) and to be very democratic and
open about their roles (Hunt, 1998). The challenge is to enable participants to
recognise the narrowness of their own experience and be open to other evidence.
The e-moderator should learn to prompt, encourage and enable such openness,
whilst acknowledging personal experience. Sensitivity and courage may be
needed to explore an experience with well-established, well-focused people!
At stage five, trainee e-moderators will start to display considerable confidence,
independence and autonomy in the online environment. Indeed, they frequently
start reverting to levels of confidence that they display in their more familiar
offline worlds! They will become responsible for their own teaching and
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
E-Moderating in Higher Education 69
development through computer-mediated opportunities and need little support
beyond that already available. Rather different skills come into play at this stage.
These are skills of critical thinking and the ability to challenge the “givens.”
Meta-cognitive learning skills are focussed on the impact of their teaching in new
contexts or how they might apply concepts and ideas.
When trainee e-moderators are learning through a new medium, such as online
learning, their understanding of the processes of using the software and of the
experience of teaching in new ways is being constructed, too. It is, therefore,
common at stage five for trainee e-moderators to reflect on and discuss how they
are networking and to evaluate the technology and its impact on the learning
processes for their arenas of teaching.
Successful E-Moderator Training
E-Moderating Training Design
Columns three and four in Figure 1 provide competencies and objectives for
training e-moderators. The model described in Figure 3 can be used to provide
a framework for training. The training programme should be intrinsically
motivating and lead to competent practice. The task is, therefore, to develop a
programme that, whilst providing the development of essential basic skills, such
as online confidence and competence, also represents as closely as possible the
realities of teaching and learning online. Providing training of this kind is the best
way of scaling up from the innovators and early adopters to the bulk of the
lecturing and teaching team (Carlson and Repman, 2002).
In order to indicate to trainee e-moderators that learning to teach online needs
to be undertaken online, the training programme should use networked technologies and be accessed from the trainees’ own machines. Furthermore, the
training should focus on pedagogical knowledge, built up through personal and
collective reflection on practice, rather than on merely acquiring a technical
grasp of the hardware and software. Most importantly, trainee e-moderators
must have the experience of working, participating and themselves learning
through others online for the training to be successful (Tsui and Ki, 2002). Such
an approach sends a powerful message and provides an invaluable confidence
builder.
The programme should create a series of “micro-worlds” in which the trainees
can interact with each other, with the e-convenors (trainer of the trainers, emoderator of the e-moderators) and with the software, before progressing to the
next stage. They should be advised of appropriate ways of undertaking the tasks,
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
70 Salmon
but could also construct their own approach. They need to learn to use the
software as a matter of routine, whilst raising their awareness of the teaching and
learning aspects. The importance ascribed in constructivism to the building of
relationships between new and existing knowledge (Bruner, 1986) means the
careful choice of titles for conferences, and the use of familiar metaphors for
explaining aspects of online learning.
E-moderator training must be meaningful and worthwhile for all lecturers if it is
to be judged a success. Each stage in the training model should provide a
“scaffold” or guide for training teachers (both new and experienced) from novice
to expert status in and through the online environment itself. Basic computer
literacy can be assumed. If teachers lack basic computing knowledge, they
should be offered familiarity training and experience first. However, even
advanced skills, for example, in using the Internet, will be insufficient. Experienced online users should be reassured that the programme is about e-moderating skills and not general technological competence. The process should be
interactive (with other trainees and online trainers), with additional downloadable
support material.
The programme should include training in declarative knowledge (What is this
icon?) and procedural knowledge (e.g., How do I send a message?). But, it
should focus mainly on more strategic knowledge (What can I do with my emoderating skills?). However, trainees should acquire these various kinds of
knowledge in an integrated way. The online training programme should not only
be about acquiring new skills, but it should also help trainees to explore their
attitudes about online learning and its meaning for their own teaching.
Helping trainees to control their frustration is a key aspect of learning to learn
online. A balance between a trainee struggling with too much complexity and
being given enough involvement in the task needs to be achieved. Give more help
when trainees get into difficulties and less as they gain proficiency.
I suggest evaluation should be based on tracking the trainees through the stages
in the programme by a series of online conferences and questionnaires of a
quantitative and qualitative nature. A certificate of completion should be
provided, as well as other motivators and incentives, if possible.
Action Based E-Moderator Training —
A Model Design
Offering a small piece of information, which I call the “spark,” and then asking
for some action or reaction on the part of trainees has proved the cheapest,
easiest and most effective design to date. This is called “e-tivities” (Salmon,
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
E-Moderating in Higher Education 71
2002). It has the advantage that little specialised technical knowledge is needed.
It is also cheap and easy to set up within an existing online platform in use in a
university or college.
Each session is offered for one week. The programme lasts for five weeks.
Participants are expected to take part for between three to five hours a week.
It works best if they log on for a half an hour each day, but many other patterns
of participation are also possible.
Session 1 includes reading résumés, writing your own résumé, practising writing
messages, practising sending e-moderating messages, exploring online chat
facilities, encouraging contributions, using help, learning to quiz, evaluating
contributions, and beginning the practice of reflecting.
Session 2 includes getting the feel of online working, sharing experiences of being
online, responding encouragingly, writing encouraging replies, identifying good
and bad practice, practising expressing emotion, determining how frequently you
should be online, exploring the nature of vicarious learners online, establishing
your group, and more reflecting.
Session 3 e-tivities include evaluating messages for encouragement, weaving,
summarising, compiling information, being encouraging without answering questions, information exchanging, and building on reflection with others.
Session 4 e-tivities include creating e-tivities, setting objectives, getting everyone
up to the same level, asking questions, acknowledging, identifying new knowledge, producing a summary, becoming more knowledgeable, working in different
size groups, and applying reflection to practice.
Session 5 e-tivities include exploring meanings, identifying ways of helping adults
learn through online interaction, planning for personal development in e-moderating skills, planning for further development in your e-moderating skills, building
your development plan for further improvement in your e-moderating skills,
identifying examples of interventions, building resources to aid development of
your e-moderating work in future, reflecting on overall experience, and farewells.
Exemplar: University of Glamorgan E-College project: Online Staff
Development in Blackboard
The core activity of the University of Glamorgan (http://www.glam.ac.uk) is the
traditional delivery of courses at the University campus, as well as through
agreements with its Associate and other Partner Colleges. Most lecturing staff
have experience only in face-to-face methods of teaching. A few have been
involved with traditional print-based, distance learning. It was decided to build on
this experience and success and to work with partners in the public, private and
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
72 Salmon
voluntary sectors to widen the accessibility of the University’s Business and
Management Courses through new methods of delivery. This work is intended
to pilot the University through its Enterprise College (e-college) initiative (http:/
/www.enterprisecollegewales.co.uk).
The concept of the project is based upon forming an alliance of complementary
organisations in the commercial, educational, media, communications, public and
voluntary sectors to deliver training and skills development. The e-college
initiative provides the additional flexibility of training and support of the University’s
students through online entrepreneurial programmes. The flexibility of online
delivery removes barriers and reaches an increased constituency of individuals,
businesses (particularly those in the SME sector), and public and voluntary
sector bodies. European Structural Funds support the development of course
material and the delivery of the training for staff. Students are able to study at
home, at work and on the college campus. They also have access to leased
computer equipment installed in their homes. This initiative provides a significant
opportunity for the University to evaluate the development, delivery and assessment of e-learning and to create a pedagogy or androgogy for this form of
education.
In order to provide staff with some expertise in e-moderating, the e-college
undertook a major staff development programme. Unusually, staff development
was put in place prior to going live with students and staff appreciated this
development.
The programme was based on an online asynchronous participative programme
in Blackboard. It used the five-stage model of e-moderating development as a
framework and interactive activities (e-tivities) to maintain interest and interaction between participants (see Figure 1). The staff development programme was
built and run on the e-college’s server. Staffs were expected to take part around
three hours per week over a five-week period in September and October 2001.
Overall aims of the training programme were:
•
Provide lecturers with the skills to access and use Blackboard conferencing
and to undertake a range of tasks online.
•
Provide lecturers with the experience and confidence to use the online
discussion system as a key resource in building a student-based online
learning community, and enable mobilisation of the learning of those
students through simple interactive and e-moderated participation (called
e-tivities).
•
Enable lecturers to become active members of an online community for Ecollege e-moderators participating in and contributing to the College’s
successes, achievement and online interaction.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
E-Moderating in Higher Education 73
Evaluation
The online programme introduced a set of simple motivational goals, by requiring
participants to reflect “deliberately” on learning at each stage. They were
encouraged to take part, to post at least one message at each of the five levels,
to contribute to the “reflections” conferences, to complete their exit-questionnaires — and only then to ask for their certificate of completion.
Results
Thirty-four lecturers involved in the E-college project started the course on or
around September 10, 2001. Twenty-seven successfully completed the course
by mid-October 2001. Another seven continued to work through the online
activities more slowly.
Although staff found the online e-moderation development programme very
challenging, nearly all appreciated the opportunity to take part, and felt that they
had achieved the objectives. Some of their final reflections are copied below:
“Some interesting reflections posted … it is heartening to know that others
are feeling the same as me — being an e-learner has made me see the other
side of the coin. I have learned a lot about learning online — a whole range
of emotions from feeling very lonely at times, experiencing happiness when
I achieve something and guilt when I know I am not contributing as much
as I should be.” CH October 01
“It also made me realise that e-moderating is not something you can do in
small parcels of time (the odd hour between classes). It needs more attention
and thought than that.” ES December 01
“I can’t believe I’ve actually reached this stage — final reflections.
Overall, I have found the course beneficial. I feel that my confidence in
online learning has increased and my navigation skills have certainly
improved (although they still are far from perfect). I also feel that I have a
better understanding and knowledge of e-learning. This course has,
however, also made me realise just how much more I’ve got to learn — I
think there is a very steep learning curve ahead of me.” GG October 01
“I have enjoyed the course and I feel I have learned a lot. I now feel more
confident about my navigation skills and a little more confident about my
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
74 Salmon
e-moderating skills. I will be even more confident once I have tried it for
real. Unlike some, I enjoyed the early stages. Finding out so much about
each other helped me feel even more the importance of online socialisation.”
NJ October 01
Dr. Norah Jones, the Project Manager, wrote:
“The programme was a success at two levels. First, it enabled us to gain
greater confidence in using the software package (Blackboard) and
secondly we were able to appreciate the need to fully engage e-learners. We
also benefited by staff from many different locations in Wales working
together online and getting to know each other through the development
programme. We see this form of staff development essential and plan to
spread development of this kind across the University for other e-learning
projects.”
Developing E-Moderating in Service
After the training and when e-moderators start to work with their online learners,
development needs to continue. During this phase I’d expect emphasis to be put
on an understanding of the benefits and role of creative thinking in e-moderating
and in the development of online group activities (see columns five and six in
Figure 1). As experience is gained, e-moderators also start to display considerable confidence and skill in keeping their online teaching fresh, alive and varied
by the use of creative thinking and inspired activities, typically going beyond the
use of online forums only for discussion.
There are two main ways that development can occur. One is through online
networking with others, and the other is through peer to peer visits to observe
online processes.
Teacher education offers an example of building online learning communities
with an impact on professional practice, going further than what is possible in
specific training events (Leach and Moon, 1999; Selinger and Pearson, 1999).
By working in such a community, participants can extend their networking
beyond the institution in which they work. They can also work with others from
different educational traditions. Selinger shows us that this aids their attempts
to seek out and understand new ideas and opinions. Thus, teacher trainees
explore new ways of tackling everyday problems and report the results to the
online community.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
E-Moderating in Higher Education 75
To gradually build up appropriate and consistent e-moderating practice and
ensure quality, you need to set up monitoring of your e-moderators’ work. You
may, like the Open University, wish to base this on a peer review system. It is
better to review and monitor the work of e-moderators online. I suggest you
make sure that the reviewers are fully comfortable and competent themselves
as e-moderators, so they don’t apply old paradigms of teaching and learning to
the new environment! I suggest monitoring that concentrates on the key issues
in Section 9. If e-moderators are coping with these issues, then you can be sure
that not only are their skills building up, but participant satisfaction also will be
growing. Of course, another important way of determining the success of the
work of the e-moderators is to explore the responses of the participants,
themselves.
E-Moderating Costs
Some vendors of online learning solutions make their return-on-investment cases
by disposing entirely of lecturer or trainer costs. Disposing of the e-moderator
is very rarely appropriate in higher and further education. Enormous value is
added to the student experience by skilled e-moderation. Increases to the
student-to-lecturer ratio are often considered detrimental to student learning and
major causes of lecturer pressures. However, skilled and trained e-moderators
can often handle large numbers of students online. The student-to-e-moderator
ratio depends largely on the purpose of the online learning.
Costing each activity related to online working is difficult, but not impossible.
Much depends on the assumptions behind the figures. For example, I compared
the estimated costs of training Open University Business School e-moderators
face-to-face with the actual costs of training them online. My estimates were
based on costs in 1996 of a face-to-face weekend for 180 e-moderators, drawn
from all over the UK and Western Europe, including travel and subsistence,
attendance fees and set up costs, excluding staffing costs and overheads. These
came to roughly £35,000 in 1996. The actual costs of the online training for 147
e-moderators totalled roughly £9,000, again without including staffing costs and
overheads. The two sets of figures do hide quite a few assumptions, but the cost
advantage was apparently considerable in that particular context. For the
business school, there is a very substantial competitive advantage in having a
large cohort of trained e-moderators for all courses that include online learning
now or will do so in the next few years. This advantage, if it could be costed, is
probably worth far more than the total cost to date of developing Internet
technologies in the school!
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
76 Salmon
Here are some ways of keeping e-moderating costs down:
Keeping E-Moderating Costs Down
1.
Make clear decisions about roles and numbers of e-moderators that you will
need and the student-to-e-moderator ratio.
2.
Keep your e-moderator support to students focused and specify what you
expect them to do and when — if necessary, publish total number of hours
per week or month available to participants.
3.
Establish early on how much e-moderators should be expected to do and
what reasonable expectations there are on the part of students.
4.
Ensure they are trained in advance of starting work with their students.
5.
Train e-moderators online, rather than face-to-face.
6.
Train e-moderators using the online platform, itself, thus creating confidence in the platform, as well as creating an e-moderating skill base.
7.
Ensure that e-moderators can upload and download messages offline if
they wish.
8.
Train them how to use your conferencing software or platform software to
best their advantage to save time.
9.
Look into transfer of costs of hardware, software and connection to
students, perhaps with grants for those unable to afford the cost.
10. Set up good helpdesk and online support systems, and encourage competent
students to support others, leaving more of your e-moderators’ online time
for learning related e-moderating skills.
11. Use existing resources and knowledge constructed online as much as
possible, rather than develop materials and/or pay for expensive third party
materials.
12. Develop systems for re-use of online conferencing materials.
13. Build up economies of scale as rapidly as possible — choose only systems
that can be expanded cheaply.
Conclusion
In empowering teachers and academic staff to become e-moderators, we need
to deploy an underlying approach to transformative learning for their development involving a process of deconstruction and reconstruction (Vieira, 2002).
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
E-Moderating in Higher Education 77
Dominant paradigms do need to be challenged (Rolfe, 2002). We need to get
below the surface and beyond the myths already grown up around the nature of
e-moderating and working online and get into offering real development help.
Currently, the “richness” of the Web depends largely on its volume and the
multimedia presentation of information. However, I believe the future brings
us greater interaction — and interaction is fundamental to learning, so long as
it is appropriately e-moderated and embedded in the overall learning methods.
From these small beginnings, a new body of knowledge and practice will build up
for e-moderators that will transfer again and again, even as more connected
technologies become available. The need for skillful e-moderation will not
disappear, regardless of how sophisticated and fast-moving the technological
environments become. E-moderators add the real value! I think that the most
successful teaching and learning organisations and associations will be those that
understand, recruit, train, support and give free creative rein to their emoderators, whilst addressing the natural fears of loss of power and perceived
quality from traditional teaching staff.
References
Alexander, S. et al. (1988). An evaluation of information technology projects for
university learning. Committee for University Teaching and Staff Development. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.
Barker, P. (2002). On being an online tutor. IETI, 39(1), 3-13.
Bennett, R. (2002). Lecturers’ attitudes towards new teaching methods. The
International Journal of Management Education, 43-58.
Bruner, J. (1986). The Language of Education. Actual Minds, Possible
Worlds. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Carlson, R. D. and Repman, J. (2002, July/September). Show me the money?
Rewards and incentives for e-learning. International Journal on ELearning, 9-11.
Collis, B. and Moonen, J. (2001). Flexible Learning in a Digital World:
Experiences and Expectations. Falmer, London: Routledge.
Cornford, I. R. (2002). Reflective teaching: Empirical research findings and
some implications for teacher education. Journal of Vocational education and Training, 54(2), 219-235.
Feenberg, A. (1989). The written word. In R. D. Mason and A. R. Kaye (Eds.),
Mindweave, Communication, Computers & Distance Education. Oxford: Pergamon.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
78 Salmon
Gaver, W. (1996). Affordances for interaction: The social is material for design.
Ecological Psychology, 8(2), 111-129.
Goodyear, P. et al. (2001). Competencies for online teaching. Education
Training & Development, 49(1), 65-72.
Hunt, C. (1998). Learning from learner: Reflections on facilitating reflective
practice. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 22(1), 25-31.
Inglis, A. et al. (2000). Delivering Digitally. London & Sterling: Kogan.
Kearsley, G. (2000). Online Education: Learning and Teaching in
Cyberspace. Belmot, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.
Leach, J. and Moon, B. (1999). Recreating Pedagogy. Learners and Pedagogy. London: Paul Chapman.
Monteith, M. and Smith, J. (2001). Learning in a virtual campus: The pedagogical
implications of students’ experiences. IETI, 38(2), 119-127.
O’Brien, B. S. (1998). Opening minds: Values clarification via electronic
meetings. Computers in Nursing, 16(5), 266-271.
Orsini-Jones, M. and Davidson, A. (1999, July). From reflective learners to
reflective lecturers via WebCT. Active Learning, 10, 32-38.
Rolfe, G. (2002). Reflective practice: Where now? Nurse Education in
Practice, 2, 21-29.
Salmon, G. (2000). E-moderating: The Key to Teaching and Learning
Online. Falmer, London: Routledge.
Salmon, G. (2002). E-tivities: The Key to Active Online Learning. Falmer,
London: Routledge.
Selinger, M. and Pearson, J. (eds.). (1999). Telematics in Education: Trends
and Issues. Oxford: Elsevier.
Tsui, A. B. M. & Ki, W. W. (2002). Teacher participation in computer
conferencing: Socio-psychological dimensions. Journal of Information
Technology for Teacher Education, 1, 23-44.
Vieira, F. (2002). Pedagogic quality at university: What teachers and students
think. Quality in Higher Education, 3, 256-272.
Waeytens, K. et al. (2002). Learning to learn: Teachers’ conception of their
supporting role. Learning and Instruction, 12, 305-322.
Williams, C. (2002). Learning on-line: A review of recent literature in a rapidly
expanding field. Journal of further and Higher Education, 26(3), 263272.
Wood, D. and Wood, H. (1996). Vygotsky, Tutoring & Learning. Oxford
Review of Education, 22(1) 5-15.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Community-Based Distributed Learning in a Globalized World
79
Chapter IV
Community-Based
Distributed Learning in
a Globalized World
Elizabeth Wellburn
Royal Roads University, Canada
Gregory Claeys
Aboriginal Development Consultants, Canada
Abstract
Through information technologies, there is an increasing connectedness of
people in both economic and educational domains. The globalized
educational environment is seen by some to be an answer to poverty and
other problems through enhanced distributed learning opportunities, while
others are concerned that globalization of education is leading to
homogeneity and a loss of autonomy for cultures and communities. The
authors of this chapter maintain the viewpoint that respectful partnerships
can be developed where communities control how their knowledge is used
and retained, while at the same time tapping into the potential that the new
technologies have to offer and maintaining an appropriate level of quality.
Two pilot programs for Indigenous learners, built with this philosophy in
mind, are described.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
80 Wellburn and Claeys
Introduction
For the main part, this short chapter is a relatively personal account of a view
toward a consultative, community-based process of distributed learning in the
global context and has as its heart the experiences of being involved in two
distributed learning pilot projects with Indigenous communities in western
Canada. As a sub-theme, this chapter also incorporates a broad-brushed picture
derived from current literature on globalization’s impact on educational issues.
It is no coincidence that topics for debate surrounding the general economic
concept of globalization are also relevant to a discussion of the creation and
implementation of distributed learning. The same technologies that have led to
globalization in the production of goods and provision of services (allowing
multinational corporations, call centres, etc.) also allow learning at a distance in
ways that have never been possible before and, as is the case with all educational
innovation, there are many complex factors to consider.
The Globalized World
In the most general sense, globalization can be defined as an increasingly
connected economic space (Stromquist and Monkman, 2000). A main argument
in support of globalization is related to the economies of scale that can be
achieved through shared knowledge and to the lofty notion that world peace
could be possible through the interconnectedness of economies if global sharing
and interdependence were to take place. This view maintains that any nation,
state or other grouping of individuals would have a huge incentive to cooperate
peacefully if all other nations, states or groups were valued economic partners.
Mussa (2000) describes this by referencing historical and current relationships
of trade, social attitudes and technologies in a paper prepared for the International Monetary Fund titled Factors Driving Global Economic Integration. A
statement from this paper is as follows: “Unwelcome efforts to exert control over
an alien people, especially in the face of armed opposition, tend to be very
expensive in blood and treasure. In contrast, devoting resources to domestic
economic development through efficient investments in physical and human
capital and development and exploitation of new technologies is an attractive and
reliable path to improved national economic well-being” (The End of Empire
section, paragraph 4). Another typical reference supporting globalization is
found in a publication by the World Bank (2000), which states: “There is
compelling evidence that globalization has played an important catalytic role in
accelerating growth and reducing poverty in developing countries … in a
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Community-Based Distributed Learning in a Globalized World
81
globalized world, societies everywhere gain from poverty reduction” (p. 1). And
similar views are expressed by the Committee for Economic Development
(CED, 2000) and many others. As 20th century economic development programs
and policies have looked to education as a tool to reduce poverty and as that
century ended, links between globalization, greater access to education, and
increased standards of living were frequently being drawn. “A greater amount
of educational attainment indicates more skilled and more productive workers
who, in turn, increase an economy’s output of goods and services. In addition,
the level and distribution of educational attainment has a strong impact on social
outcomes, such as child mortality, fertility, education of children, and income
distribution” (Barro and Lee, 2000. p. 1).
In contrast to this are widely voiced, anti-globalization concerns. Opponents of
globalization point out that to achieve the economies described by proponents of
globalization, the gap between rich and poor is widened, the quality of what is
produced is lowered, and the environment is placed at risk. As well, there are
concerns that human diversity and cultural integrity are being destroyed or
watered-down through a highly competitive, globalizing process that eliminates
all but the cheapest and most mainstream options. In short, those who oppose
globalization are expressing their dismay that it leads to the westernizing or
“coca-cola-ing” of the planet and that globalization ultimately only truly benefits
a very small, elite group. The most negative view of globalization is that it is quite
simply a corporatized continuation of the colonization that has already caused
untold destruction to Indigenous communities1 (e.g., Battiste, 2000; Stromquist,
2002). In this view, globalization represents unstoppable “rightward” thinking “in
its rejection of any government policies that have even the slightest tendency to
redistribute wealth or status” (Lowi, 2002, p. 18). Shades of this viewpoint are
sometimes reflected in terminology referring to globalized education (especially
when packaged with technology), such as “anorexic education” (Blackmore,
2000), or “education as a commodity.” Egea-Kuehne (2003) describes a
“mercantile approach to education … currently being used in the global marketing of knowledge over Internet and [falling] into what has been called the
‘industrial metaphor.’” And Tabb (2001) states that online programs, “owned
and controlled by management … take knowledge from the heads and hearts of
teachers and put it into CDs and online courses, creating an interchangeable
education that can be as standardized as Starbucks or Wal-Mart.”
Falling into neither of the two extremes described above, the vision presented in
this chapter is that globalization is not going to go away and that it has enormous
potential to be both positive and negative with respect to how individuals and
communities will ultimately conduct their lives. Working with a philosophy of
maximizing the positives through reflection and effort, educators and educational
decision-makers can incorporate technology and work within the concept of
globalization as the context to nurture skills and build opportunities at a
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
82 Wellburn and Claeys
community level. In doing so, and especially by being creative and innovative in
the use of technologies and respecting the rights of communities to retain their
knowledge and maintain control over decisions on how it is used, partnerships
can be formed in which customized education and training are designed to meet
cultural needs. This implies a conscious avoidance of the “one-size-fits-all”
vision and a movement towards what Dighe (2000) refers to as the “discourse
on diversity.”
The authors of this chapter believe that this discourse has deep roots and must
include a consideration of how individualistic versus community-focused models
of the delivery of education ultimately have an impact on the move forward in
global interdependency, along with the maintenance of community identities.
This world view difference (parallel to the contrast between a linear, behavioristic view of learning and the diversity of learning paths inherent in cognitive
constructivism 2) becomes apparent when, as individuals, we disregard the
community perspective and solely focus on our individual needs. For example,
if mass marketing of “quality controlled” training becomes a priority, then an
appreciation of the unique needs of communities can be lost. Although mass
marketed learning experiences can facilitate the acquisition of necessary skills
in a training situation, the social goals of education may suffer if local community
input (with respect to both content and delivery of education) is not incorporated.
In our view, the best strategies are conscious of the differences between
education and training and, as much as possible, incorporate constructivistic
concepts from both a cognitive community perspective and an individual
perspective. In this way balance is provided to begin to address all of the other
requirements of community connectivity and cross-cultural or global connectivity and interdependency.
Globalization and Social and Educational
Change
Globalization is a controversial concept that clearly relates to technological
advancement, which, in turn, has an impact on how education is conceived.
Stromquist and Monkman (2000) state that globalization processes (including the
skills requirements of technological advancement) have created a climate where
“the influence of business and its accompanying values and norms are spreading
throughout the world,” and ask, “What consequences will this ultimately have for
education?” (p. 19). In much of the literature, globalization is seen to have
created a competitive “have” vs. “have-not” atmosphere with respect to the
acquisition of technology-based skills for citizens (e.g., see Dighe, 2000; Carnoy,
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Community-Based Distributed Learning in a Globalized World
83
2000). Acquiring knowledge workers who are fluent in technology has become
a widely accepted goal of many corporations and nations wanting to be part of
what is increasingly referred to as the “knowledge economy.” The technologies
that assist in providing vital goods and services (including food and health care)
of uniform quality to huge masses of people require workers with some very
specific information skills — skills that need to be updated on a regular basis.
Since there is a shortage of appropriate people and since even those with the right
qualifications have to work hard to remain current, a hefty process of education
(and/or training) is required to ensure that roles are filled.
What is of concern for the humanistic educator is that the globalizing forces and
the perceived need for the creation of a new type of workforce are leading to the
deepening of economic gaps and the destruction of languages and cultures
(Petras and Veltmeyer, 2001; Hoppers, 2000; Hoogvelt, 1997; etc.), along with
changes in funding structures that have an impact on social justice and equity
(e.g., Medina, 2001; Porter and Vicovich, 2000). Acknowledging that this
argument is valid, it can still be proposed that viewing technology-based
educational projects from an alternative perspective will provide an opportunity
to consider steps to lead to consequences that are less destructive. It is also
worth considering whether the potential benefits of these new opportunities can,
in fact, strengthen diversity. Equitable broadband access and the creation of
funding structures to accomplish this would help to overcome the gaps that are
being made wider by globalizing forces. For example, in the Canadian Broadband
Internet Survey (Tewanee, March 2002, personal communication), it was shown
that in order to manage their lands, First Nations need access to GIS and other
computer-based applications, many of which are available via the Internet, yet
require high speed to download or transmit. However, remote communities have
no infrastructure to make this a reality.
The Futures Project (2000) looks at how distance education has had a role in the
developing world and describes how information technologies can alleviate the
“brain drain” and open doors for isolated groups of people. Edwards (2002)
suggests that alongside of certain types of homogenization, the trend of globalization also “produces a pressure for local autonomy and identity which may be
asserted in a range of ways” (p. 103). Indigenous distributed learning projects
confirm this, with community needs assessments and the preservation of
heritage and language often appearing as key components in the planning
process. Ideally, through appropriately designed learning environments, traditional cultural values can be synthesized with skills related to modern job
requirements (e.g., Spronk, 1995).
From a more mainstream point of view, in the context of currently changing
paradigms supporting university effectiveness (the subject of this book and a
term that can and will be explored further), the predominant indicator of
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
84 Wellburn and Claeys
globalization appears to be the provision of standardized educational experiences
to ever increasing numbers of learners. Coalitions have begun to form (such as
Universitas 213) and are examples of postsecondary course delivery partnership
strategies that cross national boundaries. Another related trend is an increasing
focus on science and technology as the most valued subject areas, with a
decreasing emphasis on liberal arts (e.g., Blackmore, 2000; Walters, 2000;
Carnoy, 2002; etc.). Going global in education generally implies the use of
distributed learning technologies for geographically widespread groups of learners and, in the view of efficiency, this idea often translates into a homogenization
of educational content. To create distributed learning programs that are marketable to as wide of an audience as possible tends to become the objective because
it is seen to be profitable. This is particularly true when education becomes either
a privatized commodity or delivered by a public institution suffering from severe,
ongoing budget cuts. Both funding scenarios are no doubt familiar to readers of
this volume and both diminish the view of education as a necessary process to
be supported for the public good. With the profit motive at the forefront,
multinational corporations have for some time been providing everything from
entertainment to running shoes to soft drinks in a cheaply produced form for mass
consumption. In the same way, technology coupled with the privatized (or
pseudo-privatized) concept of educational institutions can now easily allow an
educational institution to provide generic learning experiences to vast audiences
(or markets) who are not geographically close and who may have widely
different cultural backgrounds. If the economic imperative becomes dominant in
education, what is the social impact? To what extent is the social responsibility
that has previously defined the purpose of public education now at risk? Does the
combination of technology and the free enterprise global market have to imply
a “one-size-fits-all,” homogenized approach to learning? Or, can a vision evolve
where appropriate educational content will be developed that is customizable to
meet diverse needs? If so, who will determine the standards and how can quality
be measured?
The Issue of Quality in “TechnologyEnhanced” Global Education
Quality in industry generally refers to the maintenance of consistent standards.
In education, the concept of quality often translates into learning being measured
by tools such as standardized testing. Debate on this topic rages, with a main
concern being whether available tools do a good job of measuring what is of value
in education, or whether the requirement for measuring actually ends up driving
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Community-Based Distributed Learning in a Globalized World
85
what is taught. With globalization and distributed learning creating a need for
educational credentials to cross boundaries in ways that have not been necessary
in the past, quality is a hot topic.
In a case study of Australian higher education focusing on how globalization has
had impact on gender equity in the academic domain, Blackmore (2000) begins
by stating: “Globalization has been the justification for the radical transformation
of education in the late 1990s in most Western capitalist states. We are told that
we must be more flexible, work harder, and develop our technological skills in
order to make education contribute more to national productivity and to achieve
international competitiveness” (p. 333). She continues with an analysis of how
privatization has been seen as the solution to the reduced government funding
that is part of the global competitive emphasis. This, in turn, has led to a quality
movement that focuses on teaching and minimizes research, has allowed a new
ethos of corporate influence on educational content, and has commodified the
curriculum with “well-packaged,” but generic (and perhaps even teacherless)
online courses that are often based on behaviorist instructional design principles.
The issue of academic quality is discussed in other chapters of this volume. In
this chapter, issues relevant to how or whether diversity might coexist with the
concept of accountability and standards will be addressed. The question of what
makes an effective university in an internationalized higher education context
was dealt with in a recent presentation for the Council for Higher Education
Accreditation (CHEA) international seminar (Van Damme, 2002). Van Damme
noted that internationalization is not the same as globalization and stated that
“globalization now seems to be a much more appropriate concept to come to
terms with changes in the higher education sector.”
Van Damme also refers to protective and protectionist national policies and calls
for a global regulatory framework to ensure quality and discourage rogue
providers. To do otherwise is to risk “globalization and marketization without
restraints” (p. 6). He states that “real competition only is possible if consumers
can found their decisions on explicit and reliable information” (p. 10). Who would
determine international standards? Van Damme describes a range of strategies
to develop meta-accreditation and suggests several strategies, including reference to the SEEL Quality (e)Learning in a Knowledge Economy and Society
conference in Lisbon (May, 2003). This society (Supporting Excellence in ELearning) is a consortium dedicated to the study of the impact of quality policies
in e-learning at local and regional levels. “Regions are becoming focal points for
knowledge creation and learning in the new age of global, knowledge-intensive
capitalism, as they in effect become learning regions. The learning regions
function as collectors and repositories of knowledge and ideas, and provide the
underlying environment or infrastructure which facilitates the flow of knowledge, ideas and learning” (SEEL, 2003). This view may well provide a balance
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
86 Wellburn and Claeys
between local community-based needs and globalized sharing. Clearly there are
the beginnings of important work being done in this area.
Medina (2001) describes how in the face of the “growing tendency to borrow
market practices in order to implement them in university policies” (p. 37), wealth
is becoming more important than liberal education, corporate influence is
growing and is having an impact on educational policy, intellectual property is
more closely protected by academic institutions4 and in education as elsewhere,
globalization means that autonomy is potentially being taken away. In this case
it is faculty who, if they wish to retain autonomy, must work through “research,
teaching and political commitment ... [for] ... both justice and empowerment” (p.
37). As a balancing force, Medina references the Council on International
Education Exchange (CIEE) whose mission is “to help people gain understanding, acquire knowledge and develop skills for living in a globally interdependent
and culturally diverse world5.”
The view of university effectiveness must incorporate a vision of the type of
society that is ultimately desired and one of the most complex considerations in
any educational endeavour is the role of culture and diversity. The use of
globalizing technologies increase this complexity and when a financial bottomline becomes a priority, it is easy to neglect issues of social impact. Blackmore
(2000) describes this as encouraging “‘immediate use value’ rather than thinking
about curriculum development based on professional and academic judgment”
and describes how critical thinking and inclusiveness are declining, along with the
demise of pure foundational disciplines such as anthropology and history (p. 345)
as a utilitarian view of education gains in strength. Evaluation methods related
to the quality movement have an impact here as well, as “teaching gets
substantively harder as the capacities to attract, retain and pass students become
key performance indicators, course requirements (e.g., advanced standing,
length of courses, etc.) have been lowered, and international students have
required greater language skill support” (p. 346).
Glocalization
In contrast to terminology reflecting a centralized and homogenous view of
efficiency and quality, Edwards (2002) and others (e.g., Marshall and Gregor,
2002; The World Bank Institute, etc.) use the term “glocalization” to describe an
educational resource development process that includes a local development
team partnered with a centralized institution. Glocalization incorporates learning
materials from both the local community and the vast collection of worldwide
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Community-Based Distributed Learning in a Globalized World
87
online sources. In this view, advanced communications technologies can
reconfigure, rather than supplant, cultural diversity. The goal is to create a
“glocal” learning environment, incorporating local knowledge and culture, but
also linking learners internationally and, as one example of how this is being
addressed, the World Bank Institute has initiated a “Glocal Youth Parliament”6
which held its first annual conference in 2002. There is scope for a much more
in-depth body of literature to develop on this topic. The focus is on how
communities can work in ways to benefit from the advantages that a globalized
tool such as distributed learning can offer without succumbing to generic or nonculturally relevant learning experiences. In doing so, communities will be
strengthening their abilities to interact in the broad worldwide arena if and when
they so desire, while retaining unique identities and cultural heritage.
Indigenous Pilot Projects and the
Diversity Discourse
In 2002, Royal Roads University (RRU) in Victoria, British Columbia, Canada,
launched two new pilot programs that focused on Indigenous learners. Much
admiration and thanks is given to the learners, elders, instructors, First Nation
Communities in BC, Corporate Sector sponsors and contributors that included
representatives from RRU and various levels of governments that participated
and contributed to the programs. Congratulations are also extended to all of the
graduates of the programs that are now applying their applied assignments. Both
programs were delivered through distributed learning and included on-campus
residencies, as well as online learning experiences. Based on consultation and
research, the topics for these programs were Indigenous Corporate Relations
(ICR) and Distributed Learning Facilitation for Indigenous Communities (DLFIC).
The focus was to build upon already existing capacity building initiatives with
First Nations and aboriginal communities in, for example, education, language
preservation, economic development and health. Both programs were designed
to, and ultimately did, include learners and instructors whose home communities
were geographically dispersed — incorporating a range of remote and urban
locations within western Canada, both on and off reserve.
The literature review section of the above report described the following key
points:
•
There are many projects indicating that distance education technologies
can be effective in Indigenous communities.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
88 Wellburn and Claeys
•
Appropriately designed learning environments that include onsite facilitation can combine traditional cultural values with skills related to modern job
requirements and to the furthering of an academically oriented education.
•
Distributed learning environments can provide flexibility and self-pacing to
meet the varying learning needs of learners within Indigenous communities
and can also avoid the negative aspects that centralized institutional
learning environments often have for these learners.
•
Community consultation and needs analyses within communities are important factors to ensure that distributed learning projects are effective.
Results showed that distributed learning was seen as a good fit to meet
community needs because it provided the flexibility of allowing learners to
experience educational opportunities without leaving community responsibilities.
The history of colonization also was a factor to be considered in terms of residual
negative views of educational institutions and reluctance to participate in
mainstream education (e.g., see the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples,
1996). Aspects of the classroom-based, institutional/industrial educational model
have been acknowledged by many writers and researchers to have been
particularly damaging to Indigenous communities and there are background and
educational issues that need to be understood to effectively design new and
relevant programs (e.g., see Spronk, 1995; Distributed Learning Task Force,
1997; Davis, 2000). Based on one of the author’s experiences, successful
Aboriginal programs, particularly delivered at a community college and university level, that meet the need of building local community capacity exist and are
successfully delivered in a classroom. However, these programs that want to
expand and utilize educational technologies are located within non-aboriginal
institutions and face constant upward challenges, specifically over financial, land
issues and institutional priorities towards potential global expansion. The authors
of this paper hold the view that institutions that do not fully acknowledge
aboriginal title and rights at a community level prior to developing global
expansion plans are creating a wider digital divide.
The RRU pilot programs tried to emphasize the need for larger institutions to
understand the very underpinnings of why a digital divide exists between remote
and Indigenous communities (the “have nots”) and mainstream societies and
educational institutions (the “haves”). RRU has a lot to offer with a wide range
of programs delivered via distributed learning, but in conversation with many
aboriginal people, you will hear the institution referred to as the “epitome of
imperialism.” With its defining architectural heritage being a castle that was built
to be home to an elite British Colonial family during a time when the local
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Community-Based Distributed Learning in a Globalized World
89
Indigenous people suffered appalling consequences from colonization, its function as a military college for 40 years and its current involvement in contracts with
government in treaty and land use studies and assessments, it is perhaps not
surprising that RRU would be viewed in this way. Breaking down the perceived
walls (silos) of imperialism at RRU required the understanding of deeply
entrenched behaviour that needed to change in order to provide a foundation to
assist both groups in building capacity to work together in a globalized world.
Much work is still required.
These underpinnings include the very different world views, assumptions and
beliefs that define and provide identity for remote and Indigenous communities
and conflict with mainstream western society’s world views, assumptions,
values and beliefs. More often than not, these very underpinnings further polarize
mainstream communities and remote and Indigenous communities and cause
culture clashes between the two. Such culture clashes have caused discord in
relationships involving education and Indigenous communities. Also in this mix
are the historical relationships that mainstream education has been involved in,
including offering little or no recognition for traditional means of education via
traditional knowledge keepers, heads of families and other pre-contact governance systems both orally and in the written form that occurred in Indigenous
communities prior to European contact. These underpinnings can also be
categorized in the evolution of delivery of education as follows (Claeys &
Wellburn, 2000):
•
Pre-contact — education delivered by knowledge keepers and based on
traditional philosophies of Indigenous communities.
•
•
Contact — education delivered by missionaries.
•
Education delivered by assimilation into mainstream systems, which were
not based on constructivist models of collaborative education.
•
And, finally, today where Indigenous communities are empowering community members to take control of local education via face-to-face and
distributed models that are inclusive of the different world views, assumptions and beliefs of both western culture and Indigenous people.
Post-contact — education delivered via residential schools and via colonial,
government-controlled systems.
Without the understanding of these underpinnings, both mainstream society and
Indigenous communities will never fully engage and allow for harmony to occur
in partnership building in a local educational or in the global educational context.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
90 Wellburn and Claeys
Partnerships in the Pilot Programs
Partnership building for the pilot programs also included planning via outreach
consultation (meetings across Canada) and an advisory committee where issues
for planning and developing the programs were brought to the table for
consideration. The consultation process was also included into the foundations
of the two programs as applied assignments for learners from participating
communities. This core value is seen as essential in building partnerships for
education. Many first nation communities also signed Memoranda of Understanding with RRU to further develop partnerships for this purpose.
Ultimately, the programs were implemented following the Royal Roads model
with its cohort-based groupings for ongoing collaboration, its combination of
short residencies and longer periods of distributed learning experiences, and its
outcomes-based and applied assignments.
Partnerships with communities were key to both programs and the emphasis was
on solving real community problems. In ICR, learners worked to create new
strategies for relations between corporations and Indigenous communities.
Corporations have views similar to what Walters (2000) refers to as a form of
“risk management”7 that has become necessary due to global competitiveness.
ICR learners looked at creating mutually beneficial agreements between corporations and local communities that could best accommodate the needs of both and
move towards greater implementation of aboriginal title and rights, specifically
in the natural resource sectors. The ICR program was also based on recent
Canadian Supreme Court rulings that support aboriginal title and rights within an
Indigenous Corporate context that opposed corporate sovereignty over natural
resources. In DLFIC, projects were designed where the final outcome was the
implementation of a learning center or community learning program that met
needs identified through the needs assessment process that had been undertaken
as an early program assignment.
Note that in both programs the resulting topics for major projects were extremely
varied from learner to learner based on individual relevancy to their situations.
The range of project types added a layer of difficulty to measuring what was
learned, but since a variety of projects had been anticipated, the learning
outcomes had been developed to a large extent with a focus on having the
learners demonstrate that they were able to implement processes (such as
analyzing community needs) and think critically about issues. With care, these
types of outcomes were possible to demonstrate and measure, even in projects
that appeared to be widely disparate.
Parallel to some of the other difficulties identified in the consideration of
globalization of education with respect to quality and standards, some interesting
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Community-Based Distributed Learning in a Globalized World
91
issues emerged with respect to the Royal Roads Indigenous programs. Academic culture is based on premises that do not always mesh easily with traditional
learning in Indigenous communities and points of contention included such
concerns as entry requirements, credentialing, qualifications required for instructors and the time frames in which course assignments could be completed
by learners who were involved in community activities. These issues were not
always easily resolved and it became clear that resolution requires the necessary
commitment and resources to fully address emergent issues.
Another key issue related to the use of Indigenous knowledge (IK) within the
programs. It was made clear at the onset that projects created by learners in the
program would not require the learner or the learner’s community to have to give
up ownership of any traditional knowledge that was brought into the process.
This empowering strategy is in alignment with thinking that was shared at a
recent conference titled, “World’s Indigenous Peoples: Perspectives and Processes“ (which took place in Kelowna, BC, Canada, October 2002), referencing
current literature such as Bell (2000) and Brascoupé and Mann (2001, p. 1) who
state, “Too often, IK issues are examined from the perspective of researchers
and policy makers. Glaringly absent is a community perspective that focuses on
community control and management, even though it is the communities, no one
else, that is responsible for guarding and transmitting this knowledge.”
That community knowledge was to remain community-based and that each
community was expected to participate in the role of overseeing how such
knowledge would be used set a precedent in how courses have been delivered
at Royal Roads University. This concept of a partnership may be an extremely
important consideration for other institutions that want to “go global,” but also
want to create learning experiences that are not homogenized and generic. A
topic for discussion is the issue of intellectual property vs. Indigenous knowledge
and the already entrenched, global policies regarding the difference.
Dighe (2000) states, “The discourse on diversity not only sees participant groups
as capable of development on their own, but also sees them as being already
engaged in daily processes of self and community development. Rather than
outside ‘experts’ planning and designing programmes for meeting the needs of
different groups, the diversity discourse allows for great decision-making on the
part of the participant groups. Educational programmes emerging from this
discourse would thus look for increasingly diverse solutions rather than propagating universal solutions for all.”
For Indigenous distributed learning projects, questions such as: “How can
appropriate partnerships be established? How can the technologies that
support global communication be used to meet community needs and build
capacity? Who will decide? How should learners receive credentials?”,
have a particular relevance that needs to be further explored.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
92 Wellburn and Claeys
Strategic partnerships sought in the design and delivery of education by graduates of the Royal Roads DLFIC program would have graduates in their
respective communities forming alliances between mainstream educational
institutions and Indigenous communities that would allow for an equal transfer
of knowledge between the two. These alliances or affiliation agreements may
include a collaborative model of delivery of education, combining the strengths
and weaknesses of both systems in delivering onsite education to Indigenous
communities. These alliances and affiliations sought in the Royal Roads pilots
could potentially address communication disorders and even perhaps develop
assistive technologies and software, specifically in Indigenous languages, that
may address barriers in education for Indigenous peoples and vise versa.
The two Royal Roads pilot programs with their limited resources also tried to
provide due diligence in these following areas:
•
Address the geographical isolation of First Nation Metis and Inuit people in
the creation of learning opportunities which are facilitated by distance
education delivery modes;
•
Address the under-representation of Indigenous peoples in educational
institutions;
•
Develop courses, curriculum and strategic planning related to Indigenous
topics and education;
•
•
Acknowledge Indigenous culture, identity and pedagogy; and
Incorporate ethical research practices.
Notwithstanding the fine intentions of the programs, it has been learned that
essentially it is more difficult to work within contrasting world views without the
trust and commitment of all parties involved than it would be to work exclusively
in one or the other.
Humanizing Globalization (A Conclusion)
It is perhaps ironic that as instant communication and information transfer allows
us to know more about each other than has ever been the case before, many
people and cultures feel more threatened than ever, conflict and crises such as
war and terrorism are far from having been eliminated and we don’t really feel
connected in a global way. It is possible that a competitive nature in education
is a factor contributing to the problems of how we get along. Many traditional
Indigenous educational views support the concept that a less individualistic and
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Community-Based Distributed Learning in a Globalized World
93
more community-focused form of education is a more sustainable model. The
authors of this paper look for ways that distributed learning can be developed to
enhance collaborative learning, possibly even across diverse cultures, in ways
that will allow for respectful connections (e.g., Bates, 1995; Farrell, 1998;
Wellburn, 1999; Claeys and Wellburn, 2000). Certainly within the Indigenous
distributed learning projects there was a sense of the possibility of strengthening
capacity through maintaining a community, while tapping into a vast global
network. It is not an easy task, but to critically evaluate the situation and work
with the positive potential seems to be a better response than accepting
globalization as a homogenizing force that cannot be stopped or raging against
it in hopes that it will go away.
References
Barro, R. and Lee, J. (2000). International data on educational attainment:
Updates and implications. Retrieved March 18, 2003 from the World
Wide Web: http://www2.cid.harvard.edu/cidwp/042.pdf.
Bates, A. W. (1995). Creating the future: Developing vision in open and distance
learning. In F. Lockwood (Ed.), Open and Distance Learning Today.
London: Routledge.
Battiste, M. (2000). Protecting Indigenous Knowledge and Heritage.
Vancouver, BC, Canada: UBC Press.
Bell, C. (2000). Protecting indigenous heritage resources in Canada: Kitkatla vs.
B.C. International Journal of Cultural Property, 10, 246-263.
Blackmore, J. (2000). “Hanging onto the edge”: An Australian case study of
women, universities and globalization. In N. Stromquist and K. Monkman
(Eds.), Globalization and Education: Integration and Contestation
Across Cultures. MD: Rowan & Littlefield Publishers.
Brascoupé, S. and Mann, H. (2001). A community guide to protecting
Indigenous knowledge. Research and analysis directorate. Retrieved
March 13, 2003 from the World Wide Web: http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/pr/
ra/ind/gui_e.pdf.
Brown, J. S., Collins, A. and Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture
of learning. Educational Researcher, 18, 32-42.
Carnoy, M. (2000). Globalization and educational reform. In N. Stromquist and
K. Monkman (Eds.), Globalization and Education: Integration and
Contestation Across Cultures. MD: Rowan & Littlefield Publishers.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
94 Wellburn and Claeys
CED (2002). A shared future: Reducing global poverty. Retrieved March 18,
2003 from the World Wide Web: http://www.ced.org/docs/summary/
summary_globalization.pdf.
Claeys, G. and Wellburn, E. (2000). Partnerships and perspectives in distributed learning for indigenous communities. Retrieved March 23, 2003
from the World Wide Web: http://www.royalroads.ca/resources/
progressrpt.pdf.
Davis, L. (2000). Electronic highways, electronic classrooms. In M. Castellano,
L. Davis and L. Lahache (Eds.), Aboriginal Education: Fulfilling the
Promise. Vancouver, Canada: UBC Press.
Dighe, A. (2000). Diversity in education in an era of globalization. Retrieved
March 12, 2003 from the World Wide Web: http://www.learnder.org/dl/
VS3-00q-Diversity.pdf.
Distributed Learning Task Force (BC) (1997). Access and Choice: The Future
of Distributed Learning in British Columbia. Victoria, BC, Canada:
Centre for Curriculum, Transfer and Technology.
Edwards, R. (2002). Distribution and interconnectedness: The globalisation of
education. In M. Lea and K. Nicoll (Eds.), Distributed Learning: Social
and Cultural Approaches to Practice. New York: Routledge Falmer.
Egea-Kuehne (2003). The commodification of education: Ethico-political
issues in the global marketing of knowledge. (Paper to be presented at
The Learning Conference: Institute of Education, University of London,
July 2003). Retrieved March 22, 2003 from the World Wide Web: http://
learningconference.com/ProposalSystem/Presentations/P000295.
Farrell, G. (1999). The development of virtual education: A global perspective. Retrieved September 12, 2002 from the World Wide Web: http://
www.col.org/virtualed/.
The Futures Project (2000). The Universal Impact of Competition and
globalization in Higher Education. Retrieved March 12, 2003 from the
World Wide Web: http://www.futuresproject.org
Hoogvelt, A. (1997). Globalization and the Postcolonial World: The New
Political Economy of Development. Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University Press.
Hoppers, C. (2000). Globalization and the social construction of reality: Affirming or unmasking the “inevitable”? In N. Stromquist and K. Monkman
(Eds.), Globalization and Education: Integration and Contestation
Across Cultures, MD: Rowan & Littlefield Publishers.
Lowi, T. (2000). Think globally, lose locally. In G. Lachapelle and J. Trent (Eds.),
Globalization, Governance and Identity: The Emergence of New
Partnerships. Montreal, Canada: University of Montreal Press.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Community-Based Distributed Learning in a Globalized World
95
Marshall, S. and Gregor, S. (2002). Distance education in the online world:
Implications for higher education. In R. Discenza, C. Howard and K.
Schenk (Eds.), The Design & Management of Effective Distance
Learning Programs. Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing.
Medina, A. (2001). The impact of globalization on higher education.
Retrieved March 12, 2003 from the World Wide Web: http://www.umbc.edu/
11c/PDFfiles/theimpactofglobalization/pdf.
Mussa, M. (2000). Factors driving global economic integration. Retrieved
March 13, 2003 from the World Wide Web: http://www.imf.org/external/
np/speeches/2000/082500.htm.
Petras, J. and Veltmeyer, H. (2001). Globalization Unmasked: Imperialism in
the 21st Century. London: Zed Books.
Porter, P. and Vidovich, L. (2000, Fall). Globalization and Higher Education
Policy. Educational Theory, 50(4), 449-466.
Radcliffe, S., Laurie, N. and Andolina, R. (2002). Indigenous people and
political transnationalism: Globalization from below meets globalization from above? Retrieved March 13, 2003 from the World Wide Web:
http://www.transcomm.ox.ac.uk/working%20papers/WPTC-0205%20Radcliffe.pdf.
Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples (1996). Report of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples. Ottawa: Ministry of Supply and Services.
SEEL: Supporting Excellence in E-Learning (2003). Quality (e)Learning in a
Knowledge Economy and Society. Retrieved March 23, 2003 from the
World Wide Web: http://www.seelnet.org/seel/.
Spronk, B. (1995). Appropriate learning technologies: Aboriginal learners, needs
and practices. In E. M. Keough and J. M. Roberts (Eds.), Why the
Information Highway?: Lessons from Open and Distance Learning.
Toronto: Trifolium Books.
Stromquist, N. (2002). Education in a Globalized World: The Connectivity of
Economic Power, Technology and Knowledge. Oxford: Rowman &
Littlefield.
Stromquist N. and Monkman, K. (2000). Defining globalization and assessing its
implications on knowledge and education. In N. Stromquist and K. Monkman
(Eds.), Globalization and Education: Integration and Contestation
Across Cultures. MD: Rowan & Littlefield Publishers.
Tabb, W. (2001) Essay: Globalization and Education as a Commodity.
Retrieved March 18, 2003 from the World Wide Web: http://www.psccuny.org/jcglobalization.htm.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
96 Wellburn and Claeys
Van Damme, D. (2002). Quality assurance in an international environment:
National and international interests and tensions. Retrieved March 13,
2003 from the World Wide Web: http://www.utwente.nl/cheps/documenten/
Susdamme.pdf.
Walters, S. (2000). Globalization, adult education and development. In N.
Stromquist and K. Monkman (Eds.), Globalization and Education:
Integration and Contestation Across Cultures. MD: Rowan & Littlefield
Publishers.
Wellburn, E. (1999). Educational vision, theory, and technology for virtual
learning in K-12: Perils, possibilities, and pedagogical decisions. In C.
Feyten and J. Nutta (Eds.), Virtual Instruction: Issues and Insights from
an International Perspective. Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited.
The World Bank (2000). Poverty in an Age of Globalization. Retrieved March
13, 2003 from the World Wide Web: http://www1.worldbank.org/
economicpolicy/globalization/documents/povertyglobalization.pdf.
Endnotes
1
See Radcliffe, Laurie and Andolina (2002) for a very different perspective
on how globalization impacts Indigenous cultures.
2
See Brown, Collins and Duguid (1989) for an outline of the concepts of
cognitive constructivism, in particular the concept that knowledge does not
exist separately from the culture in which it is situated.
3
Universitas21 is described at http://www.universitas21.com/.
4
(and thus less likely for ownership of knowledge to be retained by a
community and more likely for it to become “commodified”) See the section
in this chapter on Indigenous Knowledge. Note that some widely-held
mainstream concepts of intellectual property are seen by many Indigenous
communities as being counter to a view of the sacredness of certain types
of knowledge and that since intellectual property agreements often end up
with knowledge ultimately residing in the public domain this is especially
problematic and in fact can be devastating to cultural re-connectivity.
5
See http://www.cie.org.
6
Details of the Glocal Youth Parliament are available at http://
www.glocalyouth.org/.
7
“Flexibility across boundaries of established knowledge domains is increasingly being accepted globally as necessary as new economic and social
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Community-Based Distributed Learning in a Globalized World
97
problems are addressed. Global competitiveness is driving a growing
number of corporations around the world to adopt approaches to ‘risk
management’ that require them to have more holistic and integrated
approaches to adult education and training. For example, in remote mining
areas in Canada and Chile, companies are ‘managing risks’ and these
include working with Indigenous people and managing the environmental
impact, in order that there be social and environmental sustainability. This
leads to agreements with local populations, which build on Indigenous
knowledge and incorporate some of the best participatory practices of
community adult education to engage in an integrated approach to community development. These corporations recognize the need to work closely
with the local populations in order most effectively to succeed in maximizing
profits.” (Walters, 2000, p. 206).
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
98 Wellburn and Claeys
Section II
Course Development
Instruction and
Quality Issues
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Online Course Design Principles
99
Chapter V
Online Course Design
Principles
Lance J. Richards
Texas A&M University, USA
Kim E. Dooley
Texas A&M University, USA
James R. Lindner
Texas A&M University, USA
Abstract
The premise of this chapter is that technology for course delivery will
change, but effective delivery of content is dependent upon use of appropriate
instructional design techniques. The authors take a practical approach by
providing guidelines for designing online courses and programs. These
guidelines include: (1) designing or selecting a course management tool,
(2) course planning and organization, (3) “chunking” content, (4) using
interactive teaching and learning strategies, (5) applying adult learning
principles, (6) considering self-directed and student-centered learning
approaches, (7) using authentic assessment strategies, (8) providing
online orientation and technology training, and (9) providing information
about appropriate infrastructure for learner support. We use a graduate
course, Advanced Methods in Distance Education, as “the case” to provide
specific examples of the instructional design components. By following
these approaches, you can develop a successful online learning environment.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
100
Richards, Dooley and Lindner
Introduction
Areas of competence important for teaching at a distance include course
planning and organization, verbal and nonverbal presentation skills, collaborative
teamwork, questioning strategies, subject matter expertise, involving students
and coordinating their activities at field sites, knowledge of basic learning theory,
knowledge of the distance learning field, design of study guides, graphic design
and visual thinking (Cyrs, 1997). Purdy and Wright (1992) asserted that, “it is
not that the technology underpinning distance education drives the system, but
rather that fundamental changes in teaching style, technique, and motivation
must take place to make the new ‘classrooms’ of the present and future function
effectively.” What fundamental changes must instructors make to make distance learning more effective and appropriate for a growing audience?
Often organizations focus on the technological infrastructure to build distance
education programs without giving regard to the importance of instructional
design. Technology will change — satellite, interactive video, Internet, CDROM — but effective delivery of content will remain dependent upon appropriate instructional design techniques.
Newcomers to online instruction find that instructional design principles are very
different for this medium. Principles that worked in a face-to-face environment
or even over video/videoconferencing must be modified to facilitate online
learning. Issues of social presence and immediacy behaviors are extremely
important (Gunawardena and Zittle, 1997) and the role of the instructor as a
facilitator/coach is critical. Now more than in traditional classrooms, distance
education relies upon the student’s ability to be self-directed and motivated
(Lindner and Murphy, 2001).
This chapter provides practical guidelines to designing online courses. By
following these steps, you can develop a successful, active, online learning
environment. We will use Advanced Methods in Distance Education, a
graduate course, to illustrate each of these design principles.
Origins of a Course
In the past, Advanced Methods has been taught using a combination of
interactive video and Web Course Tools (WebCT®), but we recently redesigned
the course completely for asynchronous delivery. We wanted to make the course
learner-centered and competency-based (Lindner & Dooley, 2002), rather than
relying on more traditional “contact hours.” The course includes five modules
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Online Course Design Principles
101
based upon the core competencies needed by the distance education professional (Williams, 2003; Dooley and Lindner, 2002; Thach and Murphy, 1995).
We selected a house to illustrate the entire bundle of competencies, with various
rooms representing the module themes (see Figure 1). The five course modules
and their respective locations in the house include the basement, Foundations
of Teaching and Learning at a Distance; the workroom, Technology Knowledge and Skills; the kitchen, Instructional Design; the den, Adult Learning
Theory; and the study, Administrative Issues.
Another component of our course design is measuring competence in the
modules. At the beginning of the semester, each learner completes a selfassessment instrument that corresponds with the core-competency areas in the
course. A learner who already demonstrates expertise in certain areas can
complete the outcome assessment measures in that module and move on to the
next module. In modules where the learner lacks expertise, he or she can spend
more time building competence. Our competency-based approach allows the
students to move through individual lesson sequences and allows the instructor
to act as a facilitator and authenticator of competence. At the end of the
semester the instructor uses an evaluation rubric to authenticate the students’
competence in designing a lesson for distance delivery. The learner also
completes the self-assessment instrument again to document growth in each of
the core-competency areas. The learner should be self-directed and motivated
to excel in this adult learning/asynchronously delivered environment (Lindner,
Dooley and Murphy, 2001; Grow, 1991).
Figure 1.
Design
Advanced Methods Main Course Interface Showing Module
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
102
Richards, Dooley and Lindner
Within the framework of our case study of Advanced Methods as a course
template, we can demonstrate important online-course design principles.
Design or Select a Course Management Tool
Design or select your course management tool to maximize the efficiency of
course management by the instructor and ease of use by the students. Many
universities are using Web course tools, such as WebCT® or Blackboard®, to
facilitate the online instruction process because of the many features that are
made available. These features include: an electronic grade book, password
protection for both course and student data, communication tools, tools for
managing student assignments, and license and support by the university.
Research has shown that the use of Web course tools contributes to students’
abilities to accomplish course objectives (Lindner & Murphy, 2001). Whatever
course management tool you choose should be user-friendly and intuitive for the
learner, as well as accommodating to a variety of different learning styles.
WebCT® is the course management tool for Advanced Methods and serves as
the access point for students. Figure 2 shows how WebCT® can link course
content designed in modules with communication tools, course assignments,
team projects, and student grades.
Figure 2. WebCT® Interface Used in Advanced Methods
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Online Course Design Principles
103
Course Planning and Organization
It is never enough to simply save text as HTML and assume you have developed
an online course. People tire of reading on a computer or television screen and
will end up printing it out. If your only objective is to deliver static text, you might
as well send a printed manual rather than using expensive telecommunication
technologies. (For a comparison of print versus online media, see Figure 3.) A
well-planned electronic course design will begin with storyboards to create a
visual map indicating the placement of intuitive icons, readable text formatted for
computer or TV display, good use of color and clip art or pictures, and perhaps
animated graphics to enhance understanding.
When delivering online, strive to give courses a common look and feel. Common
course components include:
Course syllabus. This should include, but not be limited to, a brief course
description, time requirements, information about course delivery, overall
course objectives, required textbooks, required meeting times for the
course, the grading policy, and a learning outline, including all due dates for
the semester or period of instruction.
Course orientation. This section should include a brief biography of the
instructor and support staff associated with the course or program of
instruction, student expectations for the course, specific information and
training concerning the submission of assignments and examinations, links
to order the course textbook(s), links to download the plug-ins necessary to
access all course materials, technology training, and information about and
links to campus support resources for distance education.
Course content. This section should include links to modules and lessons
included within the course. Within each lesson, the student should find
learning objectives, a list of required readings and activities, supplemental
readings and activities for enrichment, and links to multimedia, such as
videos or audio-annotated lectures (such as a PowerPoint® Producer file
format).
Course calendar. This section should include dates for the beginning and
ending of each module, due dates for all assignments, projects, and
examinations and university holidays affecting student progress through the
course.
Site map. This section provides an alternative way for students to access course
information. Instead of navigating through links that are three deep, the site
map provides students a “quick-click” means to access all course material
from one location.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
104
Richards, Dooley and Lindner
Index. This section provides an index of and links to all reading material, videos,
etc., arranged in alphabetical order (similar to the index in a textbook, but
hyperlinked).
Chunk Content
Electronic content should not be delivered in hour-long lectures. Whether
teaching online or through interactive television (satellite or compressed video),
learners must be given smaller chunks of content. Ideally, plan for about 10 to
Figure 3. Printed Media vs. Online Media
Printed Material vs. Online
The debate over whether to put all course material online or provide print copies to students is
highlighted by the following advantages and disadvantages of print and online.
Convenience. In general, print material is a more convenient medium than online. You
can take a book anywhere … but lugging a computer to the beach is difficult at best.
Emotional experience. Have you ever heard about anyone coming back from vacation
saying, “I took my laptop and read some really good articles online while I was away?”
Timeliness. Printed text is frozen at the time of publication and materials cannot be easily
updated. Online materials can and should be updated continuously.
Waiting. Online materials are available on demand. Have you ever had to wait for a
book order to come in? Or for the library to send you a printed copy of a periodical?
Costs. Print materials are designed for purchase. Online materials can usually be viewed
for free on a computer. People can reduce printing costs by only printing what they want
to print.
Links. While print material suggests online materials to review … online material
provide hyperlinks to take you right to the material.
Hazards. Computer screens may give off harmful radiation and cause carpal tunnel
syndrome. Print may cause your hands to get a little dirty. Have you ever looked at your
hands after reading the Sunday paper?
Interactivity. The last interactivity I saw from a book was when a flyer for another book
purchase fell out … enough said.
Waste. Online materials take up less space on your bookshelf and drawers than books
and other print material ... unless you decorate your office and house with computer
equipment.
Adaptability. I have never met a student that enjoyed buying six textbooks only to read
two or three chapters from each book. Online materials allow you to “cherry-pick”
materials to be read.
Organization. Students prefer to have all reading materials required for a course to be
organized in one central local and in general prefer print material over online material
that they have to search for.
This material is based in-part on an online article published on the Mouthshut.com web site:
http://www.mouthsut.com/readreview/24768-1.html.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Online Course Design Principles
105
Figure 4. Advanced Methods Interface Showing Lessons Within a Module
15 minutes and then vary the strategy, shift gears, and change to an exercise or
discussion. A variety of methods can be used to facilitate this process, including
Adobe Acrobat® printouts, audio-annotated lectures, World Wide Web searches,
streaming video clips, interactive Web pages, activities/exercises, chat,
whiteboards, and e-mail video discussions. For a graphical representation of
chunking content, see Figure 4.
Use Interactive Teaching and Learning Strategies
Many people fear that distance education is not as interactive as face-to-face
teaching or training. The amount of interaction we provide in a distance learning
environment also contributes to the degree of isolation a student may feel
(Shearer, 2003). Online courses can, in fact, be more interactive than face-toface courses if the instructional design features build in opportunities for
interaction with the instructor, other learners, the content, and the delivery tools
(media). Web course tools (e.g., static and dynamic Web pages, threaded
discussion groups, e-mail, chat, instant messaging, streaming media/video,
animations, application sharing, IP audio/video conferencing) are being adopted
and used increasingly by teachers to optimize delivery of instructional material
(Lindner and Murphy, 2001). Online instruction can also include student
exercises with drag-and-drop features, virtual teams, and even a scavenger hunt
of Internet resources to build interaction, just to name a few (Figure 5). All it
takes is a bit of creativity!
Use technology and the Web’s flexibility to create an active learning environment. Learning is a social process, so the interaction with the instructor and other
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
106
Richards, Dooley and Lindner
Figure 5. Increasing Student Interaction in an Online Course: Supporting
Deeper and More Meaningful Learning
Increasing Student Interaction in an Online Course:
Supporting Deeper and More Meaningful Learning
Shown below are a few examples of activities that online instructors can use to increase student
interaction and provide greater opportunity for more meaningful learning.
Icebreakers and openers. Activity designed to ease participants into the course or module of
instruction. One example, used by Lani Gunawardena, is a costume party where the students
choose a costume representing something about themselves, take a picture of themselves, and
post it on the Web with a summary of their personality.
Student expeditions. Give students a list of course topics and have them compile a list of web site
references. This is a useful way to acclimate students to the subject matter or the Web
technologies used in course delivery. As an addition to this activity students could use quality
criteria to rate other students’ lists.
PCT (Purposive Creative Thinking). Identify a conflict and locate an analogy basic to the
conflict and then produce a solution using threaded discussions or chat.
P2P. Peer to peer interaction where cooperative learning teams share coursework using threaded
discussions and chat technology.
Streaming experts. A knowledgeable person provides content to the class via a streaming video
presentation or live chat. Students will then continue discussion through threaded discussions or
chat.
Mental gymnastics. Student brainstorming on a proposed topic using threaded discussions.
Students will rate their peer’s ideas and will collectively select the best topic.
Adapted in part from Bonk and Dennen (2003) Table 23.7 and Eitington (1984), The Winning Trainer.
students is important. Michael Moore (1989) describes three interactions in
learning: learner/learner, learner/instructor, and learner/content. These three
levels of interaction “are perhaps more central to what we view as interaction
in a distance education course” (Shearer, 2003). Michael Hannifin (1989)
itemized the functions that interaction purports to support in an educational
context: pacing, elaboration, confirmation, navigation, and inquiry. Interaction
will not happen automatically; your role as instructor must shift to that of a
facilitator. One method that has worked extremely well is assigning learners to
virtual, cooperative learning teams. Each member is assigned to be a facilitator
for one of the modules. The role of the facilitator is to promote thought-provoking
discussion around the content of that particular module. This builds student/
student interaction and provides reinforcement of course content.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Online Course Design Principles
107
Because distance learners often feel isolated, one important aspect of any lesson
is gaining attention and stimulating motivation. Use of icebreakers/openers and
engaging strategies allow students to take ownership of the learning environment. In Advanced Methods, students are asked to design or modify an
icebreaker or opener based on a lesson the student will later deliver to their team
members as an asynchronous exercise. The icebreaker/opener is posted to their
team folder as a threaded discussion. Students also write clear instructions so
their team members can participate in the exercise. The icebreaker/opener is
used to build rapport with their team.
Short streaming media files are another way to have presence and immediacy
with the learners (Figure 6). Course designers and instructors should consider a
variety of ways to build rapport and engage the learners to increase course
satisfaction, retention, and interaction.
Adult Learning Principles
Distance education courses draw on the ability of adults to be self-directed.
Incorporating adult learning principles (andragogy) into the design and delivery
of distance courses will result in more effective learning. Buford and Lindner
(2002) describe several adult education principles to include in the development
of online courses (as we describe below). You can use Figure 6 to ensure adult
learning principles (Knowles, Holton & Swanson, 1998) are covered in the
design of your courses.
Figure 6.
Methods
Example Video/PowerPoint ® Presentation Used in Advanced
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
108
Richards, Dooley and Lindner
Learner’s Need to Know. Adult learners need to know why they need to learn
anything before beginning instruction. Your task is to help learners identify gaps
between what they know and what they need to know. Self-assessment
measures are particularly useful at the beginning of a course to help learners
identify gaps in their knowledge, skills, and abilities.
Self-Concept of the Learner. Adult learners want to be in control of their lives.
They do not want to be dependent on teachers to “teach” them. Courses should
focus on the self-directed nature of learners.
Prior Experience of the Learner. Adult learners come into a course with
differing life experiences. They want to use their life experiences to facilitate
learning. When possible, focus your teaching on activities that allow learners to
draw on and share their prior experiences.
Readiness to Learn. Adult learners learn best when the information to be
learned can be directly applied to solving a problem or filling an identified gap.
As much as possible, focus on information that can be directly applied to a
learner’s job.
Orientation to Learning. Adult learners learn better when teaching occurs in
the context of real-life situations. Learners are task-oriented in their approach
to learning; they want to be able to use acquired competencies to solve real
problems. Teaching should be learner-centered, not topic-centered.
Motivation to Learn. Many adult learners want to increase their competencies. They are motivated by internal motivators, such as job satisfaction, selfesteem, and quality of life. To a lesser degree, they are also motivated by external
motivators, such as higher pay, better jobs, and advancement opportunities.
Develop courses to take advantage of learners’ internal motivators.
Comprehensive details on the theory of andragogy are beyond the scope of this
chapter. For more information on andragogy and its application, see The Adult
Learner; The Definitive Classic in Adult Education and Human Resource
Development (Knowles, Holton and Swanson, 1998).
Self-Directed and Student-Centered Learning
Approaches
Many articles on course design in distance education mention the need for
student-centered approaches. Grow (1991) suggests that learners do not
necessarily know how to be self-directed. He identifies four levels of selfdirected autonomy: dependent, interested, involved, and self-directed. Your goal
as teacher, therefore, is to identify the student’s level of autonomy and match
instructional design to these levels. This process can be used to help you move
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Online Course Design Principles
109
Figure 7. Checklist for Adult Learning Principles in Online Course Design
The following questionnaire, adapted from Buford and Lindner (2002), is designed to
help teachers develop courses that take advantage of basic principles of adult learning.
Read each statement and place a check in the box that most represents your course.
Rarely Sometimes Never
1. Teaching includes structured activities that allow
students to identify their competency levels.
2. Students understand the purpose of the teaching
activity and why they are participating.
3. The course takes advantage of self-directed nature
of learners.
4. The course allows learners to be active participants
and not passive observers.
5. The course incorporates real-life examples based on
employee experiences.
6. The course content closely matches the learners’
interests or content of their job(s).
7. Participation in the course will directly help learners
solve problems related to their careers.
8. The course allows students to use their competencies
to solve real problems.
9. The course is designed to increase employee job
satisfaction.
10. Learners are willing participants in the course.
It is not likely that any one course will be able to take advantage of all adult learning
principles. However, the degree to which they can be incorporated into teaching will
result in better course design.
learners from dependency toward self-directedness. For example, when you
identify the learner as being “interested,” you should serve as a motivator and
guide, while attempting to move the student to the next level (involved) of
autonomy by incrementally shifting your role to that of facilitation. As students
become more self-directed, they must be given more autonomy to construct
meaningful learning experiences for themselves.
Constructivism is the notion that learners construct their own knowledge from
experiences. “Learning from this perspective [constructivist] is viewed as a
self-regulatory process of struggling with the conflict between existing personal
models of the world and discrepant new insights, constructing new representations and models of reality as a human meaning — making venture with culturally
developed tools and symbols, and further negotiating such meaning through
cooperative social activity, discourse, and debate” (Fosnot, 1996).
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
110
Richards, Dooley and Lindner
How can you develop courses that meet students’ beginning levels of competency and self-directedness and help them grow with other students as the course
progresses? Pre-assessment measures are necessary to ensure that you and
your students know their competency level (knowledge, skills, and abilities) at the
beginning of a course so you can provide instruction targeted specifically for the
level of each student. Such information can help students better understand their
unique bundles of competencies and increase student satisfaction, motivation,
learning and, ultimately, success in a course (Dooley and Lindner, 2002).
Competency-based feedback can provide a foundation for student-centered
learning plans. This feedback can also be used to describe minimally acceptable
knowledge, skills, and abilities on identified core competencies, thus giving
instructors tools and information needed to improve curricula, teaching materials,
evaluation processes, and instructional delivery methods (Dooley, Lindner and
Richards, 2003). A sample from the pre-assessment instrument used in
Advanced Methods is pictured in Figure 8.
Pre-assessment information can be used to help students progress through a
course. Grow (1991) observed that self-directed learning “will rarely be linear,
and most classes will contain students at different stages of self-direction.”
Students should be allowed to progress through the course at different stages.
If students demonstrate expertise in one competency area, they should be
allowed to complete an outcome assessment for that area and move on to other
competency areas that need more development. At the end of the semester, the
learner should complete a post-assessment to document growth in each core
competency area presented in the course.
Use Authentic Assessment Strategies
One question always asked about distance education courses is, “How do you
assess learning?” In the interactive, collaborative environment created by the
Internet, we recommend using the three P’s: Papers, Projects, and Portfolios.
Some courses may require more traditional assessment measures. For this
purpose, Web course tools often include online quizzing/testing features. With
these tools, the instructor creates test banks and the tools randomly select
questions for the learner, grade them, and automatically insert the score in the
grade book. Typically these test items have one right answer. They assess
knowledge and are indirect indicators of more complex abilities (Huba and Freed,
2000). However, the challenges faced by adults “tend to be those that require the
simultaneous coordination and integration of many aspects of knowledge and
skill in situations with few right answers.” As we shift to learner-centered
approaches in teaching, “we should design assessment to evaluate students’
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Online Course Design Principles
111
Figure 8. Snapshot of the Self-Assessment Instrument Used in Advanced
Methods to Authenticate Student Competency Levels at the Beginning and
Ending of the Course
Adult Learning Theory
7 Expert
6
5
4
3
Behavioral Anchor
Anchor
Behavioral
Philosophy of
of Teaching
Teaching
Philosophy
Adult Learner
Learner Characteristics
Characteristics
Adult
Learning Styles
Styles
Learning
2
1
Novice
ability to think critically and use their knowledge to address enduring and
emerging issues and problems in their disciplines.”
We used authentic assessment in Advanced Methods to demonstrate mastery
of the course competencies by actually walking the students through the
instructional design process and assessing their progress along the way. This
journey involved the design and development of a 45-minute instructional lesson
presented online to members of their cooperative learning teams. The instructor
used an evaluation rubric to authenticate competence (Figure 9). Students were
checked for mastery in each of the following areas throughout the course:
Lesson topic theme/audience. Students begin the instructional design process
by choosing a topic theme for their lesson and defining their audience.
Student-developed instructional design model. Using a constructivist
approach, students create a concept map of what they think are critical
components of systematic instructional design.
Delivery strategies. Building upon their instructional lesson, students consider
the vast variety of instructional media available to bridge communication and
facilitate instruction. At this point, students add a list of delivery strategies or
support materials they would include in their lesson.
Graphic design. In this section, students create at least two support materials
for their lesson. They may choose to create PDF® handouts, PowerPoint® slides
with graphics (which may include audio scripting or imported sounds), and links
to Internet resources.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
112
Richards, Dooley and Lindner
Creating an interface for the lesson. At this point, students create a Web
page of their instructional lesson, which should simulate an online instructional
experience for their team members. Their cooperative learning teams will
participate in the lesson, so all necessary components should be available online.
Students will include their topic theme and target audience, their lesson objectives and content, their icebreaker and/or opener, some of their interactive
strategies, links to support materials, and an outcome assessment.
Lesson evaluation. Students create a lesson evaluation (different from the
learner outcome assessment to determine if the instructional objectives were
accomplished), using the text and supplemental readings and resources to guide
them. Students then participate in each instructional lesson within their cooperative team and complete their team members’ lesson evaluations.
Provide Online Orientation and Technology Training
Although most teachers are comfortable with their content and face-to-face
presentation techniques, teaching online requires instructors to also be comfortable with the technology tools so that the technology becomes seamless and
Figure 9. Evaluation Rubric for Student Projects
Evaluation Rubric: Online Lesson (20 points maximum)
Total Score _______
Instructional objectives were met with
the lesson design and delivery
techniques.
Lesson included an icebreaker/opener
and/or exercises to gain attention and
motivate the learner.
Interactive strategies were employed
and facilitated an active learning
environment.
Instructional graphics and handouts
enhanced understanding and were easily
accessible.
Evaluation techniques matched
instructional objectives and could be
collected in a DE format.
Comments:
(4)
Excellent
(3)
Good
Minor
Revisions
Needed
(2)
Average
Major
Revisions
Needed
(1)
Poor
{
{
{
{
{
{
{
{
{
{
{
{
{
{
{
{
{
{
{
{
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Online Course Design Principles
113
transparent. That also means that we must train our learners to use the
technology interface so that it will not become a barrier to learning.
Include an orientation meeting or online tutorial to introduce the technology tools
that will be used in your course or program. For example, each student could be
sent an e-mail with information about accessing the course and a link to an online
orientation. Once the student has entered the course, the orientation could
include an introduction and brief biography of the instructors and/or the distance
learning coordinator, links to ordering the textbook(s), links to download plug-ins
needed to view the course materials, and online tutorials to introduce the
technology tools. It is difficult to separate technology skills from content delivery
in mediated-delivered courses. The learner must take initiative in learning the
communication technologies necessary for the transmission of the course.
Some instructors choose to have an on-campus orientation. If your learners are
close enough in proximity, this is a good way to build rapport. If the course tool
you choose is user-friendly, it should include a tutorial on the use of online
instructional tools.
In Advanced Methods, students demonstrate the use of online tools by
submitting a biography to the instructor by WebCT® e-mail and to their virtual
team using the WebCT® Threaded Discussion Tool. Edelstein and Edward’s
(2002) five criteria for evaluating online discussion postings include: (1) promptness and initiative, (2) delivery of post, (3) expression within the post, (4)
relevance of post, and (5) contribution to the learning community. Students are
also asked to submit the self-assessment using file-saving protocols and the
WebCT® Class Assignment Submission feature. They also watch a welcome
video and print a PDF copy of the course syllabus to ensure students have the
appropriate plug-ins for accessing course materials. In addition, we provide a
link for students to order textbooks and to find out who is on their cooperative
learning team. This is all done prior to the start of class to ensure that students
are comfortable with the format and technology before they delve into the course
content (Figure 10).
Provide Information about Appropriate Infrastructure
for Learning Support
Effective course design can only go so far. Students must also have access to
resources such as libraries and laboratories. This includes providing access to
those learners with disabilities. Instruction should seek to help expose and repair
barriers to accessibility (Bobby, 2003). Admission and registration materials
must be user-friendly and client-driven. This component deserves attention and
requires strategic visioning and administrative support from the institution
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
114
Richards, Dooley and Lindner
Figure 10.
Advanced Methods Interface Showing Course Orientation
delivering the courses or programs. If you make sure students are aware of and
know how to access campus support resources, you will save a great deal of time
throughout the duration of a course (Figure 11).
In Figure 1, you may have noticed a tree next to the house. This tree includes
links for “branching out” to support services available through the university.
Even though these links are available off the main university Web page, students
usually go to the faculty member first with questions. Our tree facilitates access
to support resources within our online course.
Future Trends
The demands of technology and design are reaching a growing number of
programs to provide teams of professionals with the tools to collaborate on the
design and delivery of distance learning courses. These teams are driven by the
content expert (usually the instructor) who may be assisted by specialists in
multimedia, instructional design, and technical communications. Throughout the
delivery of a course, the team assists the instructor with technical issues that
arise, such as updating course materials on the Web, fielding student questions,
and setting up and maintaining equipment. This frees up the faculty member’s
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Online Course Design Principles
115
Figure 11. Example of Support Services for Distance Learners
time to focus on his or her students. If you do not have the luxury of an
instructional design team, you may choose to work with technically competent
students (undergraduate or graduate), who may either earn course credit or hold
student assistant positions.
One trend we see continuing to diffuse into distance education is the use of hybrid
technologies. Web-based courses began as primarily electronically delivered
correspondence courses. They have evolved to include collaborative tools,
H.323 Internet-based videoconferencing, and streaming video/audio. With all
these multimedia tools available, the concepts discussed in this chapter provide
a reliable foundation for developing instructionally effective online learning
environments.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
116
Richards, Dooley and Lindner
To truly make a difference in online instruction worldwide, all educational
providers need to work collaboratively to share the best courses and programs
to reach a global audience. This brings up many issues that must be addressed
for the future, such as copyright and intellectual property, cultural and languageappropriate content, consideration of bandwidth and time zones across the world,
and policies and relationships with other universities and industries worldwide.
Conclusion
When designing an online course, keep in mind the following design principles:
design or select a course management tool; plan the organization of the course;
chunk content into modules; include interactive teaching and learning strategies;
incorporate adult learning principles; use self-directed and student-centered
learning approaches; use authentic assessment strategies; include an online
orientation and technology training; and provide information about the institution’s
infrastructure for learning support. As our experience in course design grows,
we have encountered more online course design challenges than those presented
in this chapter. For example, Hall, Watkins and Eller (2003) provide an additional
model for Web-based design. We have found, however, that our nine principles
serve as a foundation for ensuring that courses provide the best learning
experiences possible across programs. We hope you can use these principles to
overcome the challenges of creating student-centered learning environments to
better serve your students. As we learn, collectively, to be better instructors, we
need to continually revise our instructional delivery techniques on the basis of the
best science and art available. We hope the material presented in this chapter
contributes to both.
References
Bobby. (2003). Welcome to bobby online service. Retrieved March 7, 2003
from the World Wide Web: http://bobby.watchfire.com/bobby/html/en/
index.jsp.
Bonk, C. J. & Dennon, V. (2003). Frameworks for research, design, benchmarks, training, and pedagogy in web-based distance education. In M. G.
Moore and W. G. Anderson (Eds.), Handbook of Distance Education
(pp. 331-348). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Online Course Design Principles
117
Buford, J. A. and Lindner, J. R. (2002). Orientation, Training and Development. Human Resource Management in Local Government: Concepts
and Applications for HRM Students and Practitioners. Cincinnati, OH:
South-Western.
Cyrs, T. (1997). Teaching at a Distance with Merging Technologies: An
Instructional Systems Approach. Las Cruces, NM: Center for Educational Development, New Mexico State University.
Dooley, K. E. and Lindner, J. R. (2002). Competency-based behavioral anchors
as authentication tools to document distance education competencies.
Journal of Agricultural Education 43(1), 24-35.
Dooley, K. E., Lindner, J. R. and Richards, L. J. (2003). A comparison of
distance education competencies delivered synchronously and asynchronously. Journal of Agricultural Education, 44(1), 84-94.
Edelstein, S. and Edwards, J. (2002). If you build it, they will come: Building
learning communities through threaded discussion. Journal of Online
Distance Education Administration, 5(1). Retrieved March 7, 2003 from
the World Wide Web: http://www.westga.edu/%7Edistance/ojdla/spring51/
edelstein51.html.
Eitington, J. E. (1984). The Winning Trainer. Houston, TX: Gulf Publishing.
Fosnot, C. T. (Ed.) (1996). Constructivism: Theory, Perspective, and Practice. New York: Teachers College Press.
Future is Online. (n.d.) Retrieved January 28, 2003 from the World Wide Web:
http://www.mouthshut.com/readreview/24768-1.html.
Grow, G. (1991). Teaching learners to be self-directed. Adult Education
Quarterly, 41(3), 125-149.
Gunawardena, C. N. and Zittle, F. J. (1997). Social presence as a predictor of
satisfaction within a computer-mediated conferencing environment. The
American Journal of Distance Education, 11(3), 8-26.
Hall, R. H., Watkins, S. E. and Eller, V. M. (2003). A model of Web-based design
for learning. In M. G. Moore and W. G. Anderson (Eds.), Handbook of
Distance Education. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Hannafin, M. J. (1989). Inter-action strategies and emerging instructional
technologies: Psychological perspectives. Canadian Journal of Educational Communication, 18, 167-179.
Huba, M. E. and Freed, J. E. (2000). Learner-Centered Assessment on
College Campuses: Shifting the Focus from Teaching to Learning.
Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F. and Swanson, R. A. (1998). The Adult Learner.
Houston, TX: Gulf Publishing.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
118
Richards, Dooley and Lindner
Lindner, J. R. and Dooley, K. E. (2002). Agricultural education competencies
and progress towards a doctoral degree. Journal of Agricultural Education, 43(1), 57-68.
Lindner, J. R., Dooley, K. E. and Murphy, T. H. (2001). Discrepancies in
competencies between doctoral students on-campus and at a distance.
American Journal of Distance Education, 15(2), 25-40.
Lindner, J. R. and Murphy, T. H. (2001). Student perceptions of WebCT in a
web supported instructional environment: Distance education technologies
for the classroom. Journal of Applied Communications, 85(4), 36-47.
Moore, M. G. (1989). Editorial: Three types of interaction. The American
Journal of Distance Education, 3(2), 1-6.
Purdy, L. N. and Wright, S. J. (1992). Teaching in distance education: A faculty
perspective. The American Journal of Distance Education, 6(3), 2-4.
Shearer, R. (2003). Instructional design in distance education: An overview. In
M. G. Moore and W. G. Anderson (Eds.), Handbook of Distance
Education. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Thach, E. C. and Murphy, K. L. (1995). Competencies for distance education
professionals. Educational Technology Research and Development,
43(1), 57-79.
Williams, P. E. (2003). Roles and competencies for distance education
programs in higher education institutions. The American Journal of
Distance Education, 17(1), 45-57.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Theory and Practice for Distance Education 119
Chapter VI
Theory and Practice for
Distance Education:
A Heuristic Model for
the Virtual Classroom
Charles E. Beck
University of Colorado at Colorado Springs, USA
Gary R. Schornack
University of Colorado at Denver, USA
Abstract
A new world of distance education demands new thinking. Key components
to completing the distance educational system requires that institutions
determine how the process is designed, delivered, integrated, and supported.
Unfortunately, educational administrators tend to view distance education
merely as a process of taking existing readings, exercises, handouts, and
posting them to the Web. While this approach may seem cost effective, such
an approach is not educationally effective. Although the meaningful
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
120 Beck and Schornack
transition to e-education has just begun, determining measures of
effectiveness and efficiency requires innovations in social and political
thought beyond the advances in technology. The educational process
requires feedback from the professor, from the student, and from the wider
community, especially businesses who hire the graduates. As e-learning
and higher education reach new heights, they are changing the functions
of the university. E-learning changes all the ground rules, including time,
distance, and pedagogy. We now have new ways to reach and interact with
students, present rich content in courses, and deliver the technologies of
the smart classroom to students, wherever they are in the world.
Introduction
Education is now the second largest civilian industry in the US after health care
(Dunn, 2001). Distance education is a growth industry in the modern economy,
with American’s spending over one-half of one trillion dollars on it annually and
with over two million classes taken by online education (Shea and Boser, 2001).
As a rapid growth industry, distance education provides a method for both
educators and businesses to adjust to new market conditions. Implementing such
programs may profit from a systems model for viewing all elements of the
educational system. Our approach adapts systems theory to distance education:
the systems-based Educational Process Model serves as a heuristic to examine
recent research for insight into the distance education process. Using a valueadded approach, we are applying the model categories to organize key practices
identified from the research. Following the model’s categories, we will prepare
a list of best practices to help practitioners. Our discussion begins with an
overview of the Educational Process Model. With this systems view, we then
examine inputs into the system, including the objective educational resources and
the subjective philosophy of education. The integration of the model includes
purpose (objectives and audience), method (technology and methodology), and
pedagogy. The outputs include the objective educational experience, itself, and
the subjective outcomes. Assessment provides feedback to the system.
We presented our preliminary ideas at a state-wide conference in Teaching with
Technology held in Boulder, Colorado, in June 2002, and at the international
Conference of the World Association for Case Method Research (WACRA) in
Mannheim, Germany, in July 2002. This chapter represents our most recent
research into the new paradigm.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Theory and Practice for Distance Education 121
Background
To succeed in modern economies, businesses must help employees acquire
updated knowledge and skills, along with the ability to become lifelong learners
(“How,” 1999). The US Department of Labor projects that 75% of the
workforce will need retraining by 2005 (Bersch, 1999). Employee advancement
requires the ability to master skills and constantly learn (Messmer, 1999). In
addition to employers needing skilled workers, distance education, itself, is a
growth industry. In fact, one of the biggest providers of e-learning is the Army’s
virtual university for enlisted soldiers, which offered online college courses to
more than 12,000 students in 2001 (Charp, 2001). According to an estimate in
Forbes, the online market will become “a $10 billion virtual higher-ed market by
2003 and an $11 billion corporate-learning market by the same year” (Svetcov,
2000). Higher education estimates indicates an increase of distance courses
from 5% of students in 1999 to 15% of students by 2002 (Schofield, 1999). Along
with the increasing popularity of online learning on the college level, “corporate
America is using, distance learning, both internally and externally, for all aspects
of training” (Palmer, 2002). According to estimates, corporate training will grow
from $2.2 billion to $18.5 billion by 2005 (Charp, 2001).
This new industry is revolutionizing higher education. “Whether it’s called
distance education, asynchronous studies, online instruction or e-learning, Internetbased training has gained a significant foothold in the realm of professional
education. In addition to the time and geographic flexibility, its modalities can be
changed to fit the need of the user” (Drew, 2000). Since the time of Socrates,
teachers have met students face-to-face for discussion or lectures (“How,”
1999). Distance learning changes that basic paradigm. Distance education has
evolved from text-based correspondence courses, to videotape-based instruction, to compressed video transmission that allows for two-way audio and video
connections between the teacher and the learner (Poole, 2000). In McLuhan’s
assessment, computer-based training seemed inadequate, a mere “electronic
page-turning exercise.” However, new developments force a major rethinking
(McLuhan, 1998). Up until now, the educational system has remained teachercentric; but, it is now becoming classroom- and technology-centric. Ultimately,
education needs to become learner-centric, using the teachers and technology to
unleash students’ natural desire for knowledge (Strauss, 2002).
The rapid growth of e-learning has taken many institutions by surprise (Carlson
and Repman, 2002). Scholars and practitioners have begun to address this
“rethinking” of the distance education process. The advent of digital technologies is now transforming higher education’s culture and content. Furthermore,
the “technology of higher education is becoming as much a function of market
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
122 Beck and Schornack
mechanisms as digital media” (Schrage, 2001). As with any new approach,
however, skepticism remains. A recent study by a career information and
research firm suggests that employers may be cautious about hiring job applicants with “dot-com diplomas” (Jones, 2001). Such concerns recognize that
overall, online learning is still in its infancy (Kuchment et al., 2002). A systems
view of the field provides one way to raise the level of professionalism in distance
education and the Educational Process Model serves to fill that need.
The Educational Process Model
The foundation of the Educational Process Model is a basis system’s model
which consists of inputs, an integrative process, outputs, and feedback. In
adapting this mechanical system to human communication, Beck developed the
Rhetorical Process Model, which divided the entire process horizontally into
subjective and objective domains (1999, p. 42). The objective process of inputintegration-output became status, method, and product. The subjective process
became assumptions, purpose, and interpretation. In addition, the integration
elements of purpose and method were further divided: purpose includes intentions and audience, while method includes genre and process. These four
integration elements represent interactive, rather than linear processes, so
embodiment fills the center of the process integrating these four elements. The
form of this Rhetorical Process Model serves as the basis for the Educational
Process Model, as seen in Figure 1.
Inputs to the Process
The inputs to the educational process include the objective element of resources
and the subjective element of educational philosophy. Institutions engaging in
distance education must rethink the physical and training needs of the new
enterprise and must help faculty expand their philosophy of education in
approaching distance learning.
Resources
The obvious resources for distance education involve technology: web sites with
sufficient capacity; e-mail, bulletin boards, chatrooms; audio-video streaming;
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Theory and Practice for Distance Education 123
Figure 1. Educational Process Model
INPUT
INTEGRATION
OUTPUT
Internal
Assessment
SUBJECTIVE
Purpose
Philosophy
Ou
tco
me
s
Audiences
Objectives
Pedagogy
Methodology
Instructional
Technology
Ex
OBJECTIVE
Resources
Method
pe
rie
nc
es
External
Assessment
and interactive text, to name a few. The institution also needs technicians who
keep the equipment running. Additionally, resources include library access and
creating challenges, such as copyright permission and network security (Chepesiuk
and Gorman, 1998). Distance education may provide a means for institutions to
expand with limited resources. Since the University of Colorado at Denver has
one of the highest rates of classroom use, distance education provides a means
to expand student capacity without on-campus space (Bethoney, 1997). However, overall costs are driving higher ed both to increase revenues and to become
more cost efficient (Heerema and Rodgers, 2001).
More significant, however, are the instructor resources: institutions need to
recognize the training and workload implications of distance education. Developing an online course is far more complicated than simply posting a professor’s
lecture notes online (Green, 2000). According to some estimates, it takes 200
hours to produce one hour of online instruction, thus the need for huge
investment, with significant investments of time and money both to develop and
revise courses (O’Neal Roach, 2001). “Potential for large-scale usage has been
oversold, and return on investment is over-stressed” (Charp, 2001). A seminal
article on faculty workload identifies key resource issues: “Is an online course
comparable to an onsite campus course in regard to an instructor’s teaching
load? Even though e-mail and other online requirements may place a greater time
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
124 Beck and Schornack
demand on the instructor, will the institution recognize this factor? Is there a cap
on the maximum number of students accepted into a course? Will an instructor
be paid for developing an online course?” (Mirabito, 1996). Rather than merely
a theoretical concern, these workload issues reflect significant areas where
institutions must adapt to the human resource implication of distance learning.
For most institutions, promotion and evaluation committees “may not take
technology work seriously” (Young, 2002).
The educational institution must examine these implications and deal with them,
recognizing that distance education represents a major shift in instructional
resources and faculty development. As institutions move into distance education,
they tend to remain faculty centered, following a traditional “one size fits all”
model of pedagogy (Johnstone, 2002). Even if the institution attempts to focus on
student differences, it largely ignores individual differences among faculty
(Gilbert, 2002). In approaching instruction, institutions need to select instructors
who have “an eye and ear for how classroom content will translate onscreen.”
Such faculty must be “receptive to the idea of repackaging in an online format
the same content that they have taught in the classroom, in order to take
advantage of the additional functionality that the Web allows” (Samuels, 2001).
Ultimately, the move into distance education highlights a major lack in higher
education: People who do the majority of teaching at colleges and universities
(professors, lecturers, TAs, etc.) get no formal training in teaching at all.
Institutions assume that “a professor who cannot use a piece of chalk and a
blackboard to teach effectively will be able to do better when we give him or her
computers, VCRs, DVD players, PowerPoint presentations, video cameras, the
Internet, and a smorgasbord of digital media” (Strauss, 2002). Cheryl White
identifies the areas of faculty development needed for an effective distance
education program. These recommendations appear in Table 1.
Educational Philosophy
To a certain extent, distance education represents a change to the process: it
expands the teacher’s potential by removing the physical constraint of buildings
and distance (Stoll, 2001). The future context for distance education envisions
even greater changes, as outlined by a timeline presented in Table 2 from a recent
article in The Futurist.
To prepare for such changes, educational institutions should focus on “making
our learners smarter, [rather] than … making obsolete classrooms smarter.” To
create such a reality, faculty must consider improving their teaching skills “at
least as vital as improving their skills doing research and publishing papers”
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Theory and Practice for Distance Education 125
Table 1. Faculty Development for Distance Education
Comfort and effectiveness with all technology used in the course
Ability to model use of technology
Ability to track student activities in the course
Willingness to be innovative in teaching methods
Willingness to be innovative in use of technology
Willingness to learn while doing
Willingness to work cooperatively with technical support/design staff
Tolerance of change
Ability to commit significant time to the course
Ability to handle a high amount of interaction with students
Being a good facilitator of communication
Being able to write clear, focused messages
Providing clear expectations of student responsibilities in the course
Ability to design discussions to involve the students
- White, 2000
(Strauss, 2002). Although distance education changes the method of interaction,
it actually begins by reinforcing the traditional philosophy of effective education.
Table 3 presents the American Association for Higher Education’s principles for
effective undergraduate education (Merisotis and Phipps, 1999). Jossi would
add an additional element to this listing: a key component of success for online
education is the instructor’s “own enthusiasm for the projects” (2000).
In developing effective education at a distance, institutions must recognize
alternate ways to create a learning community. Traditional classrooms provide
a “built-in” learning community, that may or may not reach its full potential.
Distance learning, however, involves creating a virtual learning community.
Table 2. The Future of Distance Education
2005
2005
2008
2012
2015
2025
80% of US homes have PCs
Virtual reality is used to teach science, art, history, etc.
All government services delivered electronically
Purely electronic companies exist with minimal human involvement
3-D video conferencing
Learning superseded by transparent interface to smart computers
- The Technology Timeline, 2002
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
126 Beck and Schornack
Table 3.
Principles for Effective Undergraduate Education
Encourage contacts between students and faculty
Develop reciprocity and cooperation among students
Use active learning techniques
Give prompt feedback
Emphasize time-on-task
Communicate high expectations and
Respect diverse talents and ways of learning.
-Merisotis and Phipps, 1999
Even though students access a “virtual classroom” from remote locations, they
need a sense of belonging to a wider learning objective. Russell identifies the
elements needed to create an online learning community (see Table 4).
To create such a community in the new age of technology, the faculty member
must become a role model by “demonstrating depth of mastery, wisdom,
knowledge, skill, character, and enthusiasm for the subject and profession”
(Gilbert, 2002).
Table 4. Online Learning Community Model
Description
Vision of Adult Learning
and Development
Learning Contexts
Indicators of Engaged
Learning
Instructional Model
Purposes/Goals of Learning
An organization that uses technology to
mediate between the individual and collective
needs of its members to assure access to tools
for learning.
Accommodates the special social,
psychological, and political characteristics of
adult learning.
Demonstrates elements of the non-formal,
informal, and information-based models of
learning.
Provides learning experiences that are
transformative, inclusive of life experiences,
rewarding, and accommodating of learning
differences.
Interactive and generative, provides
opportunity for customizing adult learning —
adapts to a number of learning styles.
To support collective and participatory
communication and to meet a diversity of
educational and information needs.
- Russell, 1999
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Theory and Practice for Distance Education 127
Educational Integration
With resources and an effective philosophy, the educator now faces the heart of
the educational process: preparing and delivering the content. In terms of the
Educational Process Model, this Integrative area focuses on integrative pedagogy, comprised of purpose and method.
Purpose
In a major growth industry, the institutional motive for establishing educational
enterprises like distance education “is almost always to make money” (Altbach,
2000). However, the main intention should be tied more to the nature of
education itself. The purpose of education requires a dual focus — content and
audience. Faculty determines learning objectives, but they do so in light of the
specific audience, the learners who opt for a distance program.
Objectives
Distance courses need a different organization from that used in a traditional
setting. Institutions must clarify some of these distinctions, as outlined by Sjogren
and Fay (Sjogren and Fay, 2002):
•
•
•
What pedagogy is most appropriate for our goals and our faculty?
What instructional-design support do we need?
What are the appropriate assessment tools for evaluating online program
quality?
To an extent, the organizing pattern must reflect the instructor’s thorough
knowledge of the material. The instructor needs the expertise to react to
questions and to problems that arise. No longer may the instructor survive “one
chapter ahead of students”; the instructor must readily evaluate student capacities and anticipate questions” (“Debating,” 2000). In terms of organization,
distance education “unbundles” traditional faculty roles into various sub-functions (Armstrong, 2000):
•
•
•
A knowledgeable professor defines the material to be taught.
Experts in multimedia pedagogy create the structure of the course.
Technical people implement it.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
128 Beck and Schornack
•
Assessment experts evaluate the course’s success in enabling students to
learn.
Defining the course and creating the learning objectives for distance education
is a time-consuming process: “Developing an effective syllabus and teaching
style takes time. E-mail is a different medium from the classroom and requires
different techniques to be used effectively by an instructor” (“Debating,” 2000).
Since the structure of the course must consider both the content material and the
learner, the “goal should be to use the new technologies to enhance rather than
diminish higher education’s critical roles” (“Connections,” 2001). This redesign
process also requires the students to take greater responsibility for their own
education. “If the students aren’t doing the work, learning is not occurring”
(Strauss, 2002). Cini identifies the ways to design a course to meet the needs
of the distance learner, as shown in Table 5.
Audiences
The audiences within the Educational Process Model include the individual
students, themselves, as well as how the instructor anticipates the students
during course preparation. Even more than in traditional classroom education,
distance education can provide a means to support personalized learning
(Leinsing et al., 1997). Distance learning does not so much improve traditional
methods, but provides a workable alternative for students who need a higher
level of flexibility and would otherwise be unable to complete a program
(Cutshall, 2002). Additionally, focusing on the student audience recognizes that
students not only have differing learning styles, but also differing life needs as
they enroll in distance education. On a simplistic level, distance courses are ideal
for students facing time and physical constraints (“Debating,” 2000). But
convenience is not the only issue to address. Expansion in distance learning now
reaches a different student body: adults who need to brush up on certain skills,
Table 5. Criteria for Developing an Effective Online Course
- Assignments that require the learner to actively engage with the course work
and one another
- Discussions, activities, and projects that entail collaboration between learners
- A format that fits students’ schedules, career goals, and learning styles
- Access to faculty, resources, and classmates
- Convenient access to the class anytime and from anywhere
- Cini, 1998
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Theory and Practice for Distance Education 129
finish their college education, or begin new endeavors” (Branch, 2001). Most
online students are full-time workers who want to improve their skills: to train in
the latest software, to qualify for professional advancement, or to participate in
some form of education that fits their lifestyle (Green, 2000).
The student audience has begun to take charge. Learners are developing their
own personal learning contracts, focusing on their own training objectives, rather
than the traditional course instructional objectives (Maise, 1999). Successful
students in online courses are a select group: they are “motivated, self-directed
individuals who have good computer skills or who are comfortable with technology and not afraid to experiment; they … are able to work alone with minimal
guidance” (McLaughlin, 2002). Because student interaction online may fluctuate, online learning must include building a sense that people will notice if a
student leaves, or if they “don’t get sticky with the content” (Maise, 1999).
Although students tend to seek out distance education opportunities, educators
must help students clarify their own expectations for taking such a program.
Additionally, students need to learn skills to succeed: how to take notes, how to
get organized, and how to deal with the universe of data that obscures the
information they actually need to understand. Through the Internet, students
have access to millions of books and billions of Web pages, but they need to learn
how to use them effectively (Strauss, 2002). Table 6 outlines some of the
questions students need to ask. These questions have implications both for the
student and for the faculty member.
Table 6. Student Questions for Online Learning
Student’s Questions
What are the computer specifications required for this program?
Am I prepared to deal with the technology and time management demands
of online education?
How experienced is the university faculty at offering the course or
curriculum, both in subject matter and in dealing with an online
curriculum?
How willing are faculty to spend time communicating with students?
Does the online course or program facilitate student interaction in any way?
Am I someone who can learn online?
[Short, 2000]
Faculty Effort
Plan for learning across the lifespan
Identify the distinctive characteristics of adult learners
Emphasize the goals of adults
Create adult-situated contexts for learning
[Russell, 1999]
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
130 Beck and Schornack
To determine the overall purpose of distance education, institutions must
recognize the need for “smart learners, not smart classrooms.” By themselves,
smart classrooms will not be enough. For the process to succeed, faculty need
an environment that reduces teaching-related administrative tasks so they can
focus on developing courses and presenting materials (Strauss, 2002).
METHOD
The focus on method for distance education usually becomes a focus on
technology. Following the Educational Process Model, however, method
includes both the technology and the methodology that instructors use in
developing and presenting course materials.
Media
Media covers the specific technology components for the instruction, the
capacity of the hosting system, and the ability of the student’s equipment to
interface with the host system. Such consideration usually falls under the domain
of the Instructional Technology professionals available to work with the faculty.
In addition to providing course content, however, these systems must address
security issues, especially with test administration (Mirabito, 1996). Conversion
to electronic media impacts both the instructor and the student. From the
student’s view, the distance approach brings new difficulties, like “Navigating a
course’s options and jargon — various folders, forums, study guides. ... The
ideas are great, the people are great, it’s the technology that can be overwhelming if you don’t have a background in it” (Loftus, 2001). Table 7 identifies key
instructional issues related to selection and use of technology.
Learning technologies have revolutionized the traditional classroom and created
new possibilities for eLearning, but technology alone is not the point (Grush,
2002). Technology provides the means of accessing and using knowledge.
Inaccessible information remains of little value (Info World, Tom Feldon). Using
the information in a distance mode requires developing such a level of trust
between the instructor and the student that the student can freely voice doubts
and can depend on the instructor to provide guidance in how to use the process
(“Debating,” 2000). Used properly, both the computer and the Internet permit
nonlinear learning strategies where students can move between subjects in their
own time and order (Armstrong, 2000). Rather than the medium making the
difference, according to Strauss, “It’s the particular way in which you use it”
(2002). An Internet-based course can hold visitors, bring them back, and become
a favorite of the users (Maise, 1999). Done properly, distance education can
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Theory and Practice for Distance Education 131
Table 7. Media Implications for Distance Education
Identify new technologies
Become competent with a variety of technology approaches
Demonstrate multiple visual tools
Become comfortable using multiple technology tools
Reinforce new technological tools for communicating Information
Be able to sequence ideas in a logical presentation sequence
blend powerful new technology: the Internet, intranets, and e-delivered courses
— with traditional media such as instructor-led courses, audio- and videotapes,
articles, and books. The result yields a powerful, accessible learning information
source (Boxer and Johnson, 2002).
From the instructor’s point of view, conversion to distance education requires a
significant commitment in both preparation and content time. Faculty must
become familiar with the technology: “they must have extensive and responsive
technical support at all times” (McLaughlin, 2002). As reported in Forbes,
converting the curriculum to the Internet is not easy; it takes perhaps 20 times
the effort as preparing a traditional classroom instruction, according to Eli Noam,
professor of economics and finance at Columbia Business School (Svetcov,
2000). Currently, distance education is labor intensive, but with the growing
availability of quality materials, distance ed can eliminate the quantity-versusquality trade-off (Heerema & Rodgers, 2001).
Today’s state-of-the-art
mediated learning software can incorporate a built-in management component
that measures each student’s work in detail. Beyond holding students accountable for their own learning, this management tool lets instructors diagnose
weaknesses so they immediately know when an individual student falls behind
(Barker, 2000).
Methodology
Methods serve as the tactics that educators use to present information. Methodology varies by academic discipline, by educational level, and by the professor’s
personality. To meet the requirements for effective distance education, however, methodology often involves more than one person:
Courses following this approach must be organized differently from the
traditional lecture course and generally involve an “unbundling” of usual
faculty roles. ... The resulting course may contain lectures by the professor
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
132 Beck and Schornack
Table 8. Practical Methods for Developing Effective Distance Education
View your role as coach, facilitator and coordinator
Listen to your students
Don’t give answers -- ask questions
Allow students to learn by making mistakes
Encourage students to solve their own problem
Encourage students to do things their own way
Provide guidance and instruction at first -- then decrease direction over time
Be open and honest -- share pertinent information with students
Provide learning opportunities
M easure your success through the success of your students
- Adapted from Cini (1998)
who defined the course, a multiplicity of experts lecturing on specific
points, or lectures by a hired presenter to reinforce the course’s concepts,
or it is also possible the course may have no “talking heads” at all
(Armstrong, 2000).
Despite these significant variations, faculty can benefit from some practical
guidelines that can help them develop a methodology effective for online
students. Table 8 identifies these practical methods.
Teaching methods in general, however, must adapt to the distance media, where
faculty do not have the traditional contact time with students. As a result, faculty
need to adapt their methods to the distance media, following the specific
strategies identified in Table 9.
Combining teaching method with technological skills can help students reach
higher cognitive levels. Such a process requires that a faculty member becomes
a “facilitator, collaborator, and guide who makes instruction learner centered”
(Notar et al., 2002).
Pedagogy
Within the Educational Process Model, the embodiment center of the integration
process is pedagogy. Pedagogy merges objectives, student audience, technology, and methodology to produce the educational experience. For distance
education, this pedagogical effort recognizes that students must invest time to
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Theory and Practice for Distance Education 133
Table 9. Specific Strategies
Let students know when and how you prefer to be contacted,
including how often you intend to access e-mails.
Create online forums, threaded discussions, and chats.
Use the Internet to access experts and ideas from “beyond the c1assroom.”
Form student study groups with specific intent.
Keep groups small, suggested optimal size no larger than eight.
Assign teams to work together on projects.
Link each student with a mentor or a specialist in the field.
- Syllabus, David G. Brown
learn how to absorb content via computer, in contrast to traditional approaches.
On the practical level, students must even decide “whether and how to take
notes” and “how to block out appropriate time” (Aldrich, 2000). The educator’s
merging of purpose and methods comprise the educator’s pedagogy. Teachers
modify their original objectives in view of student needs and the available
technology. Methods sequences suitable for in-class discussion must change
based on the asynchronous nature of the distance process. The pedagogy
needed for distance education must overcome significant problems: “that most
teaching and learning does not occur in classrooms, that teachers and learners
have no formal training in teaching or learning, that we have not developed and
deployed the tools that teachers and students need for teaching, learning, and
administration” (Strauss, 2002). A pedagogical starting point to address the
problems begins with the Integrative process outlined in Table 10.
Although distance education starts as a paradigm shift, as it gets integrated into
the curriculum it exerts its own influence on the broader educational process.
The lines between distance education and traditional classroom learning are
blurred. Defining online and offline instruction as two separate (and sometimes
warring) entities represents an outmoded paradigm (Baker, 2000). In creating
the new paradigm, technology must not take over the process, making classrooms a complex tangle of technical gadgets that are nearly as difficult to operate
as Boeing 747s (Strauss, 2002). A guiding principle can help in this integration
— as promulgated early in the prior century by Alfred North Whitehead (1929):
The best education is to be found in gathering the utmost information from
the simplest apparatus.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
134 Beck and Schornack
Table 10. Integrating the Educational Experience for Distance Learners
1. Relate all activities, considering them building blocks for successive activities to be
addressed.
2. Employ rich learning activities: use ample examples, especially those that exercise the
three higher-levels of cognition because they provide an opportunity for ample
plausible interpretations.
3. Use pictures, not text, to the extent possible.
4. Embed the data needed to solve problems in the learning context: learning is the
retention and transfer of knowledge to new and different situations.
5. Have students provide “story” resolutions before they are exposed to “expert” solutions.
6. Support multiple links among concepts: two principle objectives to cognitive
development include long-term acquisition and retention of stable, organized, and
extensive bodies of meaningful, generalizable knowledge. The growth in the ability to
use this knowledge in the solution of particular problems means that educators must
include those problems which, when solved, augment the learner’s original store of
knowledge.
7. Present knowledge from multiple perspectives: multiple perspectives are the provision
of information such that a learner has the opportunity to utilize any of senses of
multiple intelligence that have been identified by Howard Gardner (1999).
8. Use active learning techniques.
9. Stimulate the collaborative process by presenting problems so complex that students
must work together to solve them.
10. Support continual self-assessment.
11. Provide support at critical junctures to push students past current limitations.
12. Expose students to expert performance.
13. Provide pairs of related stories (vignettes) to learning to establish transfer outside the
macrocontext.
-Notar et al., 2002
Educational Outputs
The outputs of distance education combine the actual experiences of conducting
the courses and the ultimate learning outcomes that occur.
Experiences
The output of the Educational Process Model is the actual instruction as
presented. Institutions monitor such output in terms of course schedules,
equipment usage, contact hours, credit hours generated. After all the preparation and agony, the output represents the “here it is” of education — an
objectively monitored event or series of events. Regardless of the availability of
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Theory and Practice for Distance Education 135
technology, the teacher must still produce a stimulating educational experience
(Shea and Boser, 2001). For distance education, Fabrotta provides a capsule
view of the output experience:
The virtual classroom is more than a buzzword. It represents a classroom
furnished with the Internet, e-mail, digital cameras, instant messaging and
videoconferencing, enabling students to talk to professors, instructors,
industry experts and other students from anywhere in the world using audio
and visual components (2000).
Outcomes
Virtual education brings both expected and unexpected outcomes for the
institution and for the student. For the institution, Internet-based programs
demand more faculty preparation time: Ninety percent of those surveyed say
distance learning required more time for preparation than the traditional classroom course (“New,” 2001). According to Green, deans report a “dirty little
secret ... no one is making money” (Green, 2000). If institutions jump into
distance education too quickly without planning and proper allocation of resources, the Internet could potentially weaken enrollment in smaller schools that
can’t compete with more comprehensive programs (Bascom, 2001).
From the student’s perspective, distance education attracts by satisfying practical needs: “convenience, flexibility, and access to low-incidence courses”
(Patterson, 2000). But new dynamics emerge as well. Web-based delivery does
not inhibit the development of a classroom community; rather, it actually
contributes to the formation of a cohesive group (Poole, 2000). Interaction
expands, as well: while a few students may tend to dominate a classroom
discussion so that shy individuals don’t stand a chance, in an “online classroom,”
both the shy and the pushy can easily speak up (Loftus, 2001). Overall, online
courses can foster discussion that relates more directly to the course content
(Poole, 2000). Because distance education represents a paradigm shift from
traditional education, some studies tend to compare and contrast outcomes
between distance and traditional classroom-based learning. Merisotis and
Phipps (1999) examined the following areas: student outcomes, such as grades
and test scores; student attitudes about learning through distance education; and
overall student satisfaction toward distance learning. A more in-depth assessment examines the quality of the interactions involved in the distance process.
For example, after experience with a leadership program, Cini analyzed the
online comments of students and the direction of flow, whether among students
themselves or directed toward the instructor. Table 11 presents these findings.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
136 Beck and Schornack
Table 11. Outcomes of Online Course Effectiveness
Data Measures
The quality and quantity of student comments and online discussion
The number of public messages sent to the discussion group versus the number
of private messages sent to the instructor only
The grades for the course
Findings
A deeper level of discussion emerged online than in a classroom setting, enhancing
critical thinking
Students participate more actively; shy students are as involved as more outgoing
students
Dialogue between students improved communication skills
A decreased dependence on the instructor as the sole source of knowledge
The instructor’s role changes to that of facilitator and mentor
Student access to informational resources is expanded
Learners become less dependent on the instructor
Education becomes learner-centered, as opposed to instructor-centered
Interactions between learners are increased
Collaboration between instructors and learners is the norm
Instructors become learners and learners become instructors
- Adapted from Cini, 1998
Assessment
Assessment serves a critical feedback role in the educational process. In terms
of the Educational Process Model, assessment provides feedback for the entire
system. Such feedback may not occur instantaneously, but only after the
institution has gained some experience. Assessment begins internally, but then
involves outside agencies, as well.
Internal
Distance education begins with an initial adaptation to technology, to students,
and new teaching methods. Ultimately, these changes begin to affect the rest
of the institution, thus the systems nature of the Educational Process Model.
According to Armstrong, after computer-mediated distance learning becomes
comparable in learning effectiveness to traditional lecture courses, colleges and
universities will begin to experience pressure to bring similar technologies into
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Theory and Practice for Distance Education 137
teaching within their on-campus programs (Armstrong, 2000). But changing
technology brings consequences. Beyond the faculty workload mentioned
earlier, institutions must recognize the significance of such efforts for faculty
promotion and tenure. As Young indicates in a recent article in the Chronicle
of Higher Education, “Work creating online teaching materials — such as
sophisticated Web sites or multimedia tools designed to help students — slips
through the cracks of the three traditional categories used in promotion” (2002).
And even institutions which experience early success in distance education have
no guarantees. Who, after all, is going to attend Virtual U when they can go to
Harvard online instead? (Green, 2000)
Informal and anecdotal evidence about online education finds that, “basic
demographic characteristics such as gender and age are not reliable predictors
of cyber-student performance,” and that students who were members of a
cyberstudy group had higher final grades in our class than those who preferred
to study alone (Wang and Newlin, 2002). Instructors must become more aware
of differences to identify at-risk students, because the usual cues associated with
student anxiety, inattentiveness, or apathy are not present in the virtual classroom. Specifically, instructors need to examine low “hit rates” to the course
home page and inactivity in writing or reading forum postings (Wang and Newlin,
2002). More formal findings appear in the results of a survey of faculty in
distance education, as shown in Table 12.
Table 12. Six Best Outcomes of Online Distance Delivery
Tutorial functions
Flexibility
Self-paced
Privacy
Cutting edge
Interactive feedback
Learners are able to use the system for study of basic math concepts
and review/remediation functions, allowing, more time for individual
faculty/learner contact and discussion.
Adult learners, who have significant professional and personal time
constraints, have the option of working anytime, anywhere.
Learners are not stalled by predetermined course schedules; they
may complete assignments in as little or as much time as necessary.
Learners can operate in a private environment, interact in a
computer-adaptive environment, and efficiently focus on concepts
and areas they need.
Developmental education learners, traditionally offered second-rate
services, were being offered an attractive state-of-the-art option.
Through a computer-adaptive environment, learners receive
immediate constructive feedback after each response rather than
having to wait for lesson or test results to monitor progress.
- Perez and Foshay, 2002
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
138 Beck and Schornack
External
External assessment involves outside experts, government agencies, or education associations examining individual schools or programs. According to one
overview, “The ‘factory’ university is giving way to the ‘virtual’ university”
(Dunn, 2001). This shift has gained the involvement of unions and accrediting
agencies. The American Federation of Teachers has recommended quality
standards for content support, technical support and counseling for students,
protection of intellectual property rights, and proper training for faculty (“New,”
2001). The California Virtual Campus presented the first Teaching Site Awards
to recognize exemplary online classes in the areas of educational content, course
design, use of multimedia, interactivity, community, and disabled access (Matrix,
2001). In Fall 2001, US News & World Report identified the top 26 distance
M.B.A. Programs (“E-Learning,” 2001).
While these activities represent traditional methods of institutional assessment,
the virtual classroom brings further assessment implications. The virtual university is “not a single institution, but a web of providers which collectively provide
educational services at the time, place, pace, and style desired by the client, with
quality determined by the client and a variety of approving and accrediting
bodies.” Such a process will lead to “two main types of educational institutions
— those adding value in course work and those that are certifying agencies”
(Dunn, 2001). Because distance education requires a rethinking of the process,
it can lead to a paradigm shift in educational theory and practice. Ultimately,
technology does not represent a minor change in delivery; rather, it is an integral
part of the educational system, where changing one aspect affects the rest of the
system. It can lead to the major assessment considerations for institutions, as
presented in Table 13.
Conclusion
Online learning represents one of the most important developments of the past
100 years of higher education (Learner, 2002). The interest in distance education
forces educators to rethink the entire process. To guide this rethinking, we are
presenting the Educational Process Model as a way to identify elements of the
entire distance process. We have applied this model to selected research
findings as the initial phase of our ongoing research. The model’s categories
identify the elements of the educational process and provide a way to group the
findings of existing research. As we look toward the future, some educators see
distance education as “the greatest door-opener to knowledge in recorded
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Theory and Practice for Distance Education 139
Table 13: Issues to Consider in Implementing Online Learning
Understand why distance learning is used as specific institutions
Enter into agreements with for-profit entities with great caution
If new revenue generation is a clear institutional motivation, understand the
economics
If new revenue generation is a clear institutional motivation, watch the quality
Try for more than automation of the traditional classroom
Faculty compensation and intellectual property are significant issues; use shortterm agreements and understand the economics
Adapted from Berg (2001)
history” (Thomas, 1999). This growing distance industry will have the incentive
to create even better technology to improve the process. Technologists are
working toward tele-immersion, an “advanced shared environment” that will one
day create the illusion that you are in the same room with people at a distance
(Virtual Roundtable, 2000). However, we are not yet at that juncture. Both
teachers and students need to learn new skills. In particular, they face the
“daunting task” of overcoming “FUD — fear, uncertainty, and doubt” (Patterson,
2000).
E-learning and higher education are reaching new heights and are changing the
functions of the university. E-learning has changed the ground rules of everything, including time, distance, and pedagogy. We now have new ways to reach
and interact with students, present rich content in courses, and deliver the
technologies of the smart classroom to students wherever they are in the world.
In evaluating the learning process, educators must get feedback from their
students and potential students. An exchange in the “Virtual Roundtable”
captures this need:
Schaaf: “You’ve suggested that educators have not traditionally looked
for feedback from the learner.”
Schank: “That’s exactly right, because they don’t give a damn about
students. But, we do. You have to because people are going to be able
to vote finally [take a virtual course at another school]” (2000).
Although educators may see distance education as a “rethinking” or a “paradigm
shift,” the “Virtual Roundtable” addresses this process in a more succinct
fashion. As the second-half of the title states, “the e-Learning Revolution Is Not
about Computers, it’s about Communication.” While we have used a commu-
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
140 Beck and Schornack
nication-based systems model to examine the process, Mary Furlong makes the
communications aspect alive (“Virtual Roundtable,” p. 72):
You go online because of information.
You stay online because of the relationships that form.
References
Aldrich, C. (2000). Customer-focused e-learning: The drivers. Training and
Development, 54(8), 34.
Altbach, P. G. (2000). The crisis in multinational higher education. Change,
32(6), 29.
Armstrong, L. (2000). Distance learning: The challenge to conventional higher
education. Change, 32(6), 20.
Barker, J. (2000). Sophisticated technology offers higher education options. T H
E Journal (Technological Horizons in Education), 28(4), 58.
Bascom, L. C. (2001). Budgetary blues: As the annual higher education budget
battles heat up, new challenges ranging from the repeal of the estate ax to
the Internet pose bottom line problems. Matrix: The Magazine for
Leaders in Higher Education, 2(3), 22-26.
Beck, C. E. (1999). Managerial Communication: Bridging Theory and
Practice. Prentice-Hall.
Beck, C. E. and Schornack, G. R. (2001). Electronic communication: The
challenge to innovate. Journal of American Academy of Business,
Cambridge, 12(1), 122-130.
Berg, G. A. (2001). Distance learning best practices debate. WebNet Journal,
3(2), 5.
Bersch, C. (1999). Making the grade. Communication News, 36(12), 18.
Bethoney, H. (1997). Easing the learning slope. PC Week, 14(43), 50.
Boxer, K. and Johnson, B. (2002). How to build an online learning center: Online
learning centers may be the new construct for training and development.
T&D, 56(8), 36.
Branch, A. (2001). Thomson busy, then shuts down Harcourt’s higher education
web site. Matrix: The Magazine for Leaders in Higher Education, 2(4),
13-14.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Theory and Practice for Distance Education 141
Brown, D. G. (2002). Connecting with students. Syllabus, 16(3), 24.
Carlson, R. and Repman J. (2002). Show me the money? Rewards and
incentives for e-learning. International Journal on E-Learning, 1(3), 9.
Charp, S. (2001). E-learning. T H E Journal (Technological Horizons in
Education), 28(9), 10.
Chepesiuk, R. and Gorman, M. (1998). Internet college: The virtual classroom
challenge. American Libraries, 29(3), 52-55.
Cini, M. A. (1998). Learning leadership online: A synergy of the medium and the
message. Journal of Leadership Studies, 5(2), 103.
Connections for a New Millennium. (2001). Change, 33(1), 4.
Cutshall, S. (2002). When online learning works. Techniques, 77(5), 22.
Debating Distance Learning. (2000). Communications of the ACM, 43(2), 11.
Dunn, S. L. (2001). Fuel for the future. USA Today (Magazine), 129, 28.
E-Learning: Best Online Graduate Programs: Business. (2001). U.S. News and
World Report. Retrieved from the World Wide Web: www.usnews.com/
usnews/edu/learning/rankings/mba_reg_prof.htm.
Frabotta, D. (2000). Continuing education: Cornell University’s dean-elect plans
to focus on research, technology-based learning. Hotel and Motel Management, 215(10), 7.
Gilbert, S. W. (2002). Personalizing pedagogy. Syllabus, 16(3), 26.
Green, J. (2000). The online education bubble. The American Prospect, 11(22),
32.
Grush, M. (2002). Editor’s note. Syllabus, 16(2), 3.
Heerema, D. L. & Rodgers, R. L. (2001). Avoiding the quality/quantity tradeoff in: Distance education. T H E Journal (Technological Horizons in
Education), 29(5), 14-19.
How the Web Is Revolutionizing Learning. (1999). Business Week, 3661, 40.
Johnstone, S. M. (2002). U.S. distance learning: A ‘cottage industry.’ Syllabus,
15(7), 18.
Jones, C. (2001). Out of a Cracker Jack Box? As online degrees start showing
up on people’s resumes, what will the business world think of them? Online
Learning, 5(4), 51.
Jossi, F. (2000). Online adventures: The motivation factor. Technology &
Learning, 20(9), 32.
Kuchment, A., Binlot, A. and Ferro, C. (2002). Acing Oxford – from home.
Newsweek International, June 10, 68.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
142 Beck and Schornack
Learner, N. (2002). Experts: New ‘paradigm’ needed for online learning.
Education Daily, 35(183), 1.
Leinsing, D., Rosen, L. and November, A. (1997). Building a Community of
Excellence. National Forum, 77(1), 31-37.
Loftus, M. (2001). But what’s it like? U.S. News & World Report, October 15,
56.
Masie, E. (1999). Creating stickier online learning sites, classrooms. Computer
Reseller News, June 7, 56.
________. (2001). Matrix: The Magazine for Leaders in Higher Education,
2(1), 62.
McLaughlin, J. (2002). Getting online. Getting up to speed. International
Journal on E-Learning, 1(3), 21.
McLaughlin, J. (2002). Surf or turf? Deliberations about distance education.
International Journal on E-Learning, 1(2), 18.
McLuhan, R. (1998). The online learning curve. Computer Weekly, July 2, 38.
Merisotis, J. and Phipps, R. (1999). What’s the difference? Change, 31(3), 1217.
Messmer, M. (1999). Skills for a new millennium. Strategic Finance, 81(2), 1011.
Mirabito, M. (1996). Establishing an online education program. T H E Journal
(Technological Horizons in Education), 24(1), 57-60.
New AFT Report Proposes Standards of Online Programs. (2001). Black
Issues in Higher Education, February 1, 43.
Notar, C., Wilson J. and Ross, K. (2002). Distant learning for the development
of higher-level cognitive skills. Education, 122(4), 642.
O’Neal Roach, J. (2001, June). E-learning: Is it the end of medical schools?
Student BMJ, 174.
Palmer, P. (2002, July). From a distance: Getting a degree in your time and
space. Black Enterprise, 52.
Patterson, J. (2000). Building the virtual classroom. Curriculum Administrator,
36(7), S14.
Perez, S. and Foshay, R. (2002). Adding up the distance: Can developmental
studies work in a distance learning environment? T H E Journal (Technological Horizons in Education), 29(8), 16.
Poole, D. (2000). Student participation in a distance-oriented online course: A
case study. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 33(2), 162.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Theory and Practice for Distance Education 143
Robb, D. (2000). At home with Internet-based training. Risk Management,
47(7), 27.
Russell, M. (1999). Online learning communities: Implications for adult learning.
Adult Learning, 10(4), 28.
Samuels, D. (2001). On learning online. Risk Management, 48(2), 8.
Schofield, J. (1999). Back to school online: For thousands of students, online
learning is proving to be a match made in cyberspace. Maclean’s,
September 6, 22.
Schrage, M. (2001). Brave new world for higher education. Technical Review,
104(8), 90.
Shea, R. and Boser, U. (2001). So where’s the beef? U.S. News & World
Report, October 15, 44.
Short, N. (2000). Online learning: Ready, set, click. RN, 63(11), 28.
Sjogren, J. and Fay, J. (2002). Cost issues in online learning: Using ‘co-opetition’
to advantage. Change, 34(3), 53.
Stoll, J. (2001). No time for class? Log on to Internet. Automotive News,
75(5915), 28.
Strauss, H. (2002). New learning spaces: Smart learners, not smart classrooms.
Syllabus, 16(2), 13.
Svetcov, D. (2000). The virtual classroom vs. the real one. Forbes, 166(7), 50.
The technology timeline. (2002). The Futurist, 36(5), 33.
Thomas, S. (1999). Adult learning goes online. Computer Shopper, 19(10), 331.
A virtual roundtable: Why the e-learning revolution is not about computers: It’s
about communication. (2000). Training, 37(9), 64-76.
Wang, A. and Newlin, M. (2002). Predictors of performance in the virtual
classroom: Identifying and helping at-risk cyber-students. T H E Journal
(Technological Horizons in Education), 29(10), 21.
White, C. (2000). Learn online. T H E Journal (Technological Horizons in
Education), 27(9), 66.
Whitehead, A. (1929). The Aims of Education and Other Essays. MacMillan.
Young, J. (2002). Ever so slowly, colleges start to count work with technology
in tenure decision. Chronicle of Higher Education, February 22, A25.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
144 Martz, Reddy and Sangermano
Chapter VII
Looking for Indicators
of Success for
Distance Education
Wm. Benjamin Martz, Jr.
University of Colorado at Colorado Springs, USA
Venkateshwar K. Reddy
University of Colorado at Colorado Springs, USA
Karen Sangermano
University of Colorado at Colorado Springs, USA
Abstract
The purpose of this chapter is to identify key components of distance
education satisfaction. The distance education environment is an expanding
market driven by several market forces. A working list of potential variables
for satisfaction can be developed from the previous research done to
compare the traditional to the distance education environments. A
questionnaire was developed using these variables and administered to
341 distance students in a successful, top 26, M.B.A., distance education
program. The results of the questionnaire are factored into five constructs
that ultimately correlate well with the satisfaction ratings of the subjects.
Using these factors as guidance, some operational and administrative
implications of those findings are discussed.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Looking for Indicators of Success for Distance Education
145
Introduction
The primary market driver for Distance Education is that it is the major growth
segment in the education industry. In 1999, nearly 80% of the public, four-year
institutions and over 60% of the public, two-year institutions offered distance
education courses. More than 1.6 million students are enrolled in distance
courses today. Technology advancements, such as the Internet, video streaming,
voice-over IP, groupware, intranets, etc., are enabling this vast market. Traditional education providers, such as universities, see the market as a way to
expand. More than 90% of all colleges are expected to offer some online courses
by 2004 (Institute of Higher Education Policy, 2000). Corporations envision
online training warehouses saving large amounts of training dollars. Combined,
the virtual education market and its sister market, corporate learning, are
predicted to grow to more than $21 billion by the end of 2003 (Svetcov, 2000).
Other Market Drivers
There are several other drivers in the growth and acceptance of distance
education. First, job market expectations are changing. In the past, employees
and employers maintained employment relationships over long periods of time.
Today, employees are not expected to stay in the same job for long periods of
time. The current modes of careers include: multiple careers, combinations of
part-time work in multiple jobs, telecommuting, leaving and then reentering the
full-time work force, switching jobs, etc. Today’s employee easily envisions the
need to maintain a level of knowledge current with his or her career demands
(Boyatzis and Kram, 1999). The concept of lifelong learning has emerged.
Lifelong learning is the idea that people, in order to respond to the quickly
changing work environment, will need to perform continuous learning throughout
their work careers.
The educational institution, itself, sees a growth opportunity. The program
implemented must make operational and financial sense, but may be seen as a
way to make money (Shepherd et al., 2002). For example, elective classes that
do not have sufficient enrollments on-campus may pick up enough distance
students to make teaching the course more feasible (Creahan and Hoge, 1998).
Costs savings may be obtained and, if significant enough, may drive up demand
as costs may be lowered. Finally, most educational institutions serve a geographical region, either by charter or by mission and a distance learning program may
be a practical method to help satisfy this strategic mission (Creahan and Hoge,
1998). There can be problems, too. For example, the administrative premise that
the distance education program will save money (Creahan and Hoge, 1998) can
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
146 Martz, Reddy and Sangermano
be both problematic and counterproductive. This may not prove true as the
technological infrastructure (i.e., network servers, student support), along with
the faculty training required for an above-average distance program, is substantial. Finally, if successful, the complexity caused by the sheer volume of large
distance classes may not be anticipated.
The sheer size and complexity of this opportunity significantly raises the stakes
for those organizations undertaking distance education. Customer satisfaction is
one of the key factors contributing to the Malcolm Baldridge awards, a top award
for quality in the commercial business world. In the new Malcolm Baldridge
evaluation criteria, (ISO9001: 2000), companies are asked to better show a
program’s effectiveness through customer satisfaction. Vavra (2002) proposes
that the best way to demonstrate effectiveness is to “correlate customer
satisfaction with customer behavior.” Gustafsson et al. (2000) show customer
satisfaction linked significantly to quality at the Volvo Car Corporation. In their
more broad analysis of well-run companies, Peters and Waterman (1982)
deemed customer satisfaction as a key factor contributing to the companies’
performance.
With this perspective in mind, it makes sense that satisfaction, as an important
measure of quality, transfers to distance education programs. One of the key
factors to a program’s success will be the satisfaction of one of its key
stakeholder — its students.
Impact of Commercialization
However, the “commercialization” of education raises its own concerns about
the basic process of learning (Noble, 1999). For example, are there any problems
fundamental to the distance environment because of limited social interaction?
Retention may be one such problem. Carr (2000) reports a 50% dropout rate for
online courses.
Haythornthwaite et al. (2000) think they’ve found another one. They coined a
term, “fade back,” to describe when students do not participate in the distance
class. They looked at how social cues, such as text without voice, voice without
body language, class attendance without seating arrangements, and students
signing in without attending Internet class impacted students “fading back.”
They found that the likelihood of students “fading back” is greater in distance
learning classes than in face-to-face classes.
Hogan and Kwiatkowski (1998) report on the social aspects of teaching in large
groups in the United Kingdom. Their argument includes the premise that
technology can handle the activity of teaching to large groups; However, the
emotional aspects of this teaching method have been ignored. Similar concerns
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Looking for Indicators of Success for Distance Education
147
are raised from Australia, where technology has been supporting distance
teaching for many years. Hearn and Scott (1998) argue that before adopting
technology for distance teaching, that technology must acknowledge the social
context of learning.
Historically, researchers have been exploring the impact of technology on
education since 1928 (Russell, 1999). These technologies have included correspondence classes, broadcast and recorded video, audio records and tapes,
audio-graphic, video and computer conferencing (Moore, 1995). For the purposes of this discussion, distance education is defined as “creating a learning
environment that facilitates structured learning without the traditional practice of
face-to-face interaction in an on-campus environment” (Martz and Shepherd,
2002).
These studies raised other areas of concern. Tinto (1975) compared the learning
retention of distance groups with traditional groups and found that social
integration was a key factor in successful retention of traditional groups. Dixon’s
(2001) feedback studies found that timely feedback was a key to the self-worth
and satisfaction with distance courses reported by students. Several researchers
and educators are studying how distance education classes create a sense of
community (Haythornthwaite et al., 2000; Dede, 1996). Finally, and somewhat
intuitively, computer skills (Carabajal, 2000) have been found to positively impact
student satisfaction with distance classes.
Two other factors, trust and isolation have been suggested by Kirkman et al.
(2002). Studies by Ragan (1998) and Kirkman et al. (2002) showed that
“frequent interaction” and “rapid responses,” respectively, helped foster trust in
the virtual environment. Kirkman et al. (2002) went further and suggested that
“establishing norms” for communication patterns is a key factor in trust
development. Finally, Kirkman et al. (2002) identified the feelings of isolation as
a major issue for virtual environments such as distance education.
Changes to the Educational Environment
By definition, the paradigm of distance education changes the education environment. This means that students will probably respond differently to this environment than they do to the traditional classroom. For example, Palloff and Pratt
(1999) conjecture that those students considered introverts will handle the
electronic environment better than their extroverted counterparts. Their logic
suggests that the distance environment’s characteristic of a delayed, thoughtful
process will fit better with the basic interaction activity of an introvert than with
an extrovert. Further, as Brookfield (1995) notes, this change impacts the
faculty, as well. For popular, personable faculty, this distance environment will
minimize this positive attribute.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
148 Martz, Reddy and Sangermano
Distance education is also impacting the basic pedagogy of education. Bilimoria
and Wheeler (1995) posit a model called Learning Centered Education (LCE),
which “places learning and learners at the core of the educational process.”
Essentially, a learning partnership is created whereby the teacher identifies what
needs to be learned and the student helps identify the means by which their own
learning occurs. The student helps to customize his or her own learning. The
concept works because it sets clear expectations on both sides of the relationship. The teacher facilitates and the student participates.
Finally, academic researchers have always been interested in explaining how
people react to the introduction of technology. This is true of the distance
education environment. With regard to how people learn, Polanyi (1966)
suggested a recurring cycle of today’s new technology becoming tomorrow’s
commonplace technology. Poole and DeSanctis (1990) suggested a model called
Adaptive Structuration Theory (AST). The fundamental premise of the model is
that the technology under study is the limiting factor or the constraint for
communication. It further proposes that the users of the technology, the senders
and the receivers, figure out alternative ways to send information over the
channel (technology). The term used for this adaptive activity is “appropriation”
and it “refers to the manner in which structures are adapted by a group for its
own use …” (Gopal et al., 1993). A good example here is how a sender of e-mail
may use combinations of keyboard characters or emoticons (i.e., :) — sarcastic
smile; ;) — wink ; :o — exclamation of surprise) to communicate more about
their emotion on a subject to the receiver. For distance education, this model
would imply more satisfaction: (1) if the technology used establishes an adequate
communication channel, or (2) if the technology is used over time.
Despite the large number of students, educators and organizations involved with
distance education, the debate still rages as to its effectiveness. The complex
environment contains issues around how students learn, what motivates students
to learn, how to make the learning environment better, how to make the
environment worthwhile for all the stakeholders and how technology impacts the
learning environment. The study of these complex issues and interactions falls
into the broad field of social informatics that Kling (2000) defines as the study
of the interaction of information technologies with an institutional and cultural
perspective.
Is distance education comparable to the traditional classroom? The simple
answer is: maybe. A review of more than 400 studies compared distance to
traditional classroom instruction with complex and conflicting results (Russell,
2001). On the positive side, faculty at eCollege.com reported that their students
learned equally effective online as they did on campus (TeleEducation NB,
1999). GSS studies are identifying and reconfirming the important characteristics in developing a sense of community in virtual teams, such as satisfaction
(Chidambaram and Bostrom, 1997); trust (Aranda et al., 1998); cohesiveness
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Looking for Indicators of Success for Distance Education
149
(Chidambaram, 1996) and participation (Nunamaker et al., 1991). However, a
distance learning environment brings with it additional concerns, such as higher
rates of student anxiety and frustration (Hara and Kling, forthcoming). In total,
though, the preponderance of studies currently reported found “no significant
difference” in the learning process between traditional in-class and distance
modes.
While the results of all of these conjectures, hypotheses and studies remain
inconclusive in settling the distance-versus-traditional-educational-environment
debate, they do provide insights for studying satisfaction in the distance environment. The fundamental concerns for differences in the two environments create
a great working set of variables for our purposes here. We can adopt our
predecessors’ rationale as we look for indicators of satisfaction within distance
education. A short list of potential indicators includes: computer skills, effective
use of technology, fairness, interaction and feedback, technology support,
program reputation, the characteristics of traditional classroom (multiple communication channels, personal and social interaction), isolation, workload, customized learning, course content, learning and satisfaction.
The Research Study
Methodology
The program studied is one of the largest, online, AACSB-accredited M.B.A.
programs in the world (US News and World Report, 2001). Authors had access
to proprietary information, such as grades and class e-mail lists, allowing for a
richer analysis of the data. Together, these characteristics increase the overall
credibility of the results for the audience.
The methodology used is an exploratory factor analysis (Tucker and MacCallum,
1997) in nature. Sample surveys such as this fit well with McGrath’s (1984)
discussion of research techniques. His discussion of good research design
focuses on addressing three criteria: generalizabilty; context; and precision of
measurement of desired behavior. McGrath concedes that no research methodology can maximize all three criteria, but suggests that a good methodology will
consider the impact of all three. As a sample survey of distance education
participants, our methodology maximizes the generalizability criteria (McGrath,
1984). The other two criteria are addressed secondarily in the design, as the
subjects are still in the environment with which the research is concerned — a
distance education program. This means that the subjects are still in the
appropriate context and that the ratings reflect current behavior. As such, the
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
150 Martz, Reddy and Sangermano
context and measurement of desired behavior confounds should be somewhat
minimized.
Instrument
A questionnaire with a battery of 49 questions was developed using the literature
discussed earlier as a guide. First, each subject was asked to identify a reference
course about which to answer the questions. Once the subject identified his or
her reference course, that subject’s grade was obtained from administrative
records and recorded. In addition, four other demographic questions gathered
information on gender, number of courses taken, student status, amount of time
expected to spend in the reference course, and the amount of time actually spent
in the reference course.
Two sets of five-point Likert (1 = Strongly Agree, … 5 = Strongly Disagree)
questions were used. The first set of nine questions concentrated on the
technology used in the reference course. Each two-part question asked if a
particular technology (e-mail, electronic forums as a group or class, online tests,
group projects, electronic announcements, phone calls, electronic gradebook,
fax/postal mail) was used and, if so, how effective was its usage? An additional
data item, LOHITECH, was developed by placing the subjects into two groups.
One group reported using three or less technologies, while the other group
reported using four or more technologies in their reference class. This classification was created to allow an analysis correlating satisfaction to the level of
technology used.
The second set of questions asked students to rate their experience with the
reference distance course against statements concerning potential influences for
satisfaction. These questions associated a five-point rating scale to statements
about the impact of technology, course content, tests, instructor interaction and
feedback, critical thinking, Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of
Business (AACSB) accreditation, workload expectations, socialization and
satisfaction. The order of the questions was randomly determined and the
questionnaire was reviewed for biased or misleading questions by non-authors.
An example of the questionnaire is provided in Appendix A. Other students and
researchers previewed the questionnaire before it was sent to the subjects. The
questions are labeled for reference purposes.
Subjects
The questionnaire was sent to 341 students enrolled in the distance M.B.A.
program. In Fall 2002, the program served 206 students from 39 states and 12
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Looking for Indicators of Success for Distance Education
151
countries. The majority of these students are employed full-time. The program
used in this study has been running since Fall 1996 and has over 179 graduates.
It offers an AACSB accredited M.B.A. and its curriculum parallels the oncampus curriculum. Along with the general M.B.A., there are seven different
areas of emphasis offered to customize the M.B.A. for a student’s interest.
Close to 33% of the enrolled students are female. The oldest student enrolled is
60 years old and the youngest is 22. The average age of all students enrolled is
35. More than 25 Ph.D. qualified instructors participate in developing and
delivering the distance program annually. Recently, the news magazine US News
and World Report (2001) classified the program as one of the top 26 distance
education programs.
There were 131 usable questionnaires returned. The student’s final grade for
their reference course was obtained and added to the questionnaire record as a
variable. These were separated into two groups: 30 that had not yet taken a
course and 101 that had completed at least one course. This second group, those
students who had completed at least one course, provided the focus for this
study.
Results and Discussion
Question 24, “Overall, I was satisfied with the course,” was used as the subject’s
level of general satisfaction. The data set was loaded into SPSS for analysis.
Table 1 shows that 23 variables, including LOHITECH, proved significantly
correlated to satisfaction (Q24).
The large number of significant variables leads to the need for a more detailed
analysis on how to group them (StatSoft, 2002). Kerlinger (1986) suggests the
use of factor analysis in this case “to explore variable areas in order to identify
the factors presumably underlying the variables.” Kim and Mueller (1986)
further suggest that a factor analysis can be used for data reduction and to obtain
factors that can be used for further study. A SPSS factor analysis was performed
using Principal Component Analysis with a Varimax Extraction on those
questions that had proven significantly correlated to satisfaction. Table 2 shows
the reliability factor (Cronbach’s Alpha) and eigenvalue for each of the five
components derived from the factor analysis.
Four questions, Q28, Q39, Q23, and Q37 offered somewhat ambiguous loading
factors on the components. Ultimately, each of these was combined into a factor
based upon: (1) the addition of the variable to the factor did not reduce the
component’s reliability below .7000, and (2) the topic of the question entered
matched with at least one of the original variables and theme of the component.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
152 Martz, Reddy and Sangermano
Table 1. Questions that Correlate Significantly to Satisfaction
ID
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
26
28
30
31
33
34
36
37
38
39
42
43
46
LOHITECH
Question Statement
I was satisfied with the content of the course.
The tests were fair assessments of my knowledge.
I would take another distance course with this professor.
I would take another distance course.
The course workload was fair.
The amount of interaction with the professor and other students was what I
expected.
The course used groups to help with learning.
I would like to have had more interaction with the professor.
The course content was valuable to me personally.
Grading was fair.
Often I felt “lost” in the distance class.
The class instructions were explicit.
Feedback from the instructor was timely
I received personalized feedback from the instructor.
I would have learned more if I had taken this class on-campus (as opposed to
online).
This course made me think critically about the issues covered.
I think technology (e-mail, Web, discussion forums) was utilized effectively in
this class.
I felt that I could customize my learning more in the distance format.
The course content was valuable to me professionally.
I missed the interaction of a “live,” traditional classroom.
Overall, the program is a good value (quality/cost).
Aggregate of Yes votes in Q6 through Q15
Correlation
Coef.
Sign.
.605
.473
.755
.398
.467
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.710
.000
.495
-.508
.439
.735
-.394
.452
.592
.499
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
-.400
.000
.423
.000
.559
.000
.254
.442
-.341
.258
.270
.001
.000
.002
.017
.012
Consequently, all reliability coefficients (Cronbach Alpha) are above .7000,
indicating an acceptable level for a viable factor (Kline, 1993; Nunnally, 1978).
Finally, the five components explain 66.932% of the variance. We discuss
possible interpretations of the factors next.
Interaction With Professor: The first component for study combines five
questions: Q18, Q21, Q28, Q33, Q34. The themes permeating these questions
seem to center on feedback and interaction with the professor. The feedback
statements Q33 and Q34 show that feedback that is timely and personalized
helped raise the satisfaction ratings. The other two, Q21 and Q28, show the
relationship with the professor to be important. Q21 asks explicitly about the level
of interaction with the professor, while Q18 gets at the same thing implicitly —
since a student reporting high satisfaction is more likely to take another course
with the same professor.
Fairness: Q17, Q20, Q28 and Q31 create the second construct. Clearly, Q17,
Q18 and Q20 fit this description. All three ask explicitly about the fairness of the
tests, the course workload and grading. Q31 asks about the explicitness of the
instructions given for the course. This variable fits into the construct by realizing
that more explicit instructions are probably setting expectations for the course.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Looking for Indicators of Success for Distance Education
153
Table 2. Result of Factor Analysis
ID
1
.576
.643
.794
.848
Q18
Q21
Q33
Q34
Q17
Q20
Q28
Q31
Q16
Q26
Q39
Q42
Q23
Q30
Q36
Q43
LOHITECH
Q19
Q22
Q37
Q38
Q46
Reliability(1)
.8573
Eigenvalue
8.520
(1) SPSS – Cronbach’s Alpha
Component and Loading Factors
2
3
4
5
.722
.738
.411
.512
.596
.850
.308
.825
-.354
-.514
-.809
-.770
.7715
1.853
.7286
1.630
.7948
1.541
.508
.596
.542
.494
.478
.700
.7358
1.181
Courses with changes in instructions or that have ambiguous instructions are
probably perceived less fair.
Course Content: The third component derived seems to center around course
content. First, three of the questions, Q16, Q26, and Q42, explicitly focus on
course content. It seems likely that “good” course content would influence the
basic satisfaction of that course. Note that content is perceived from both a
personal and professional level. While Q39 about the student’s ability to
customize learning has a low loading factor, it fits here when we realize that if
a student is customizing their learning, they are choosing course content.
Classroom Interaction: The questions composing the fourth construct, Q23,
Q30, Q36, Q43, all have negative loading values. Interestingly, the statements in
these questions were testing many of the concerns expressed with the “commercialization” of distance education. So, a negative correlation means that the
students that were more satisfied with their online experience: (1) did not miss
the interactions of a traditional classroom (Q43), (2) did not want more
interactions (Q30), (3) did not think they would have learned more if they took
the course in a traditional environment on-campus, and (4) did not exhibit the
feeling of being lost in the class.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
154 Martz, Reddy and Sangermano
Technology and Value: The last factor derived seems to be the least homogenous, as it appears to have three disparate subsets: Value, learning and
technology. Q46 asks the subject directly to rate the value of the course, while
Q19 asks whether or not the subject would take another distance course. These
two questions represent the value characteristic of the factor. Q38 and the
derived variable, LOHITECH, show the technology characteristic of the factor.
The way that the LOHITECH variable was derived provides a measure of the
magnitude of technology used in the reference course, while the perceived
quality of that use may be indicated in Q38. Finally, Q22 and Q37 ask for ratings
on “learning” for groups and thinking “critically.” Tying these together in a single
construct, one can imagine that for distance courses, two components such as
technology use and learning influence the notion of value. In support of the
viability of this proposition, Table 3 shows the correlations of Q22, Q37, Q38 and
LOHITECH to the fundamental value question Q46.
Twenty-two variables from the questionnaire proved significantly correlated to
satisfaction. A factor analysis of those 22 variables extracted five possible
constructs. These constructs were labeled: Interaction with the Professor;
Fairness; Content of the Course; Classroom Interaction; and Value, Technology
and Learning. Each of these constructs were based upon the key characteristics
of the underlying questions. Table 4 shows the results of combining the ratings
for the questions in each construct and correlating each of them to satisfaction.
As can be seen from the table, the constructs hold up well as five indicators of
satisfaction.
Impact on Distance Education
Administration
As mentioned earlier, the organization, which is the school in this case, is a key
stakeholder in the success of a distance education program. Distance education
courses and programs are not only used for providing an alternative delivery
method for students, but also to generate revenues for the offering unit/college/
university. As the number of distance courses and programs increase at an
Table 3. Correlation of Learning and Technology Use to Value (Q46)
Area(Question)
Learning(Q22)
Learning(Q37)
Technology use (Q38)
Technology use (LOHITECH)
Correlation
.426
.211
.296
.203
Significance
.000
.035
.005
.042
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Looking for Indicators of Success for Distance Education
155
Table 4. Correlation of Final Constructs to Satisfaction
Construct
Professor Interaction
Fairness
Course Content
Classroom Interaction
Technology Use and Value
Correlation
.771
.695
.588
-.515
.624
Significance
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
exponential rate, the necessity to enhance quality and revenues also takes
prominence.
The administration of distance programs is especially challenging since, for
example, in most cases you probably will rarely see your students. Any feedback
from students is generally limited to questionnaires and complaints. The distance
education administrators have the responsibility to ensure that both the faculty
and students are satisfied with their respective teaching and learning experiences. This satisfaction translates into an overall requirement for higher quality
distance courses and better retention of distance students. Table 5 suggests
operational recommendations based upon this study that can impact online
program success.
The data in this study indicates that a timely and personalized feedback by
professors results in a higher level of satisfaction by students. The administrators, therefore, have to work closely with their faculty and offer them ways to
enrich the teacher-student relationship. Paradoxically, the faculty need to use
technologies to add a personal touch to the virtual classroom. For example,
faculty should be encouraged to increase the usage of discussion forums,
responding to email within 24 to 48 hours, and keeping students up-to-date with
the latest happenings related to the course.
From an administrative perspective, fairness in the virtual classroom is an
academic issue and, therefore, is best left to the instructor’s prerogative. The
pedagogical details such as assignments, grading scale, test and quiz content,
etc., are best left to the instructor. However, administrators can work closely
with faculty members to develop effective policies and procedures that help set
realistic student and faculty expectations. For example, some content delivery
platforms do not keep their session “active” while the student takes a test. In turn,
some ISPs will log users off after 15 minutes of inactivity. This combination of
automated tests longer than 15 minutes and an ISP inactivity policy that
automatically logs users off after 15 minutes can create great havoc and anxiety
for distance students. A simple administrator “heads up” to students and faculty
about this possible technology quirk with the testing platform can help with the
perception of fairness.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
156 Martz, Reddy and Sangermano
The data also indicates that good course content and explicit instructions
increase student satisfaction in the virtual classroom. It may well be that course
content basically sets expectations and explicit instructions manage these
expectations for the distance student. This result suggests that faculty should
have complete web sites with syllabi and detailed instructions. In turn, it also
suggests that distance education administrators should focus their attention on
providing faculty with support, such as good web site design, instructional
designer support, test design, user interaction techniques, etc., appropriate for
distance learning.
Interestingly, in a further analysis of this data, distance students that were more
satisfied with their online experience didn’t miss the traditional classroom
interactions, did not think they would have learned more if they took the same
course on campus, and did not feel that they were lost in the classroom. It is clear
that a majority of students who enroll in distance classes are self-selected and
know what to expect in an online course. They realize and accept that their
experience will not be similar to a traditional classroom experience. In turn, they
seem better prepared to make the most out of the distance classroom tools to
enhance their learning experience. This data is very valuable to the distance
administrator who is working on retention efforts. Knowing that these traits are
significant for student satisfaction, an administrator can focus on and market to
prospective students who are more likely to exhibit these traits.
Since distance students’ notion of value intertwines learning and technology, it
is imperative that distance administrators offer and that faculty use the available
technology in the distance program. Technology, in this case, not only refers to
the actual software and hardware features of the platform, but also how well
technology is adapted to the best practices of teaching. The results imply that if
technology is available, but not used, it lowers satisfaction. So, technology
options that are not being used in a course should not appear available. For the
Table 5. Recommendations to Increase Online Program Success
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
Have instructors use a 24-48 hour turnaround for e-mail
Have instructors use a one week turnaround for graded assignments
Provide weekly “keeping in touch” communications
Provide clear expectation of workload
Provide explicit grading policies
Explicitly separate technical and pedagogical issues
Have policies in place that deal effectively with technical problems
Provide detailed unambiguous instructions for coursework submission
Provide faculty with instructional design support
Do not force student interaction without good pedagogical rationale
Do not force technological interaction without good pedagogical purpose
Collect regular student and faculty feedback for continuous improvement
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Looking for Indicators of Success for Distance Education
157
program administrator, this would suggest adoption of distance platforms that are
customizable at the course level with respect to displaying technological options.
Conclusion
This study attempts to identify potential indicators for satisfaction with distance
education. A body of potential indicators was derived from the literature
surrounding the traditional-vs.-virtual classroom debate. A 49-question questionnaire was developed from the indicators and was administered to M.B.A.
students in an established distance education program. A total of 101 usable
questionnaires were analyzed, with the result that 22 variables correlated
significantly to satisfaction. A factor analysis extracted five basic constructs and
these factors were defined based upon the variables within each construct.
Assuming that the constructs were valid, the chapter’s final section discusses
several administrative implications for obtaining more satisfaction in a distance
program.
References
Aranda, E. K., Aranda, L. and Conlon, K. (1998). Teams: Structure, Process,
Culture and Politics. New York: Prentice-Hall.
Bilimoria, D. and Wheeler, J. V. (1995). Learning-centered education: A guide
to resources and implementation. Journal of Management Education,
19(3), 409-428.
Black, J. (1997). Retrieved January 12, 2000 from the World Wide Web: http:/
/www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,7147,00.html.
Boyatzis, R. E. and Kram, K. E. (1999, Autumn). Reconstructing management
education as lifelong learning. Selections, 16(1), 17-27.
Brookfield, S. D. (1995). Becoming a Critically Reflective Teacher. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Carr, S. (2000). As distance education comes of age the challenge is keeping
students. Chronicle of Higher Education, February 11.
Chidambaram, L. (1996, June). Relational development in computer-supported
groups. MIS Quarterly.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
158 Martz, Reddy and Sangermano
Creahan, T. A. and Hoge, B. (1998). Distance Learning: Paradigm Shift of
Pedagogical Drift? Presentation at Fifth EDINEB Conference, September 1998, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.
Dede, C. (1996). The evolution of distance education: Emerging technologies
and distributed learning. American Journal of Distance Education, 10(2),
4-36.
Dixon, D. (2001). Mentoring Over Distance. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Fielding Graduate Institute.
Gobal, A., Bostrom, R. B. and Chin, W. (1993, Winter). Applying adaptive
structuration theory to investigate the process of group support systems.
Journal of Management Information Systems, 9(3), 45-69.
Gunawarden, C., Lowe, C. and Carabajal, K. (2000). Evaluating Online
Learning Models and Methods. Society of Information Technology and
Teacher Evaluation International Conference in San Diego, California.
ERIC No.: ED444552.
Gustafsson, A., Ekdahl, F., Falk, K. and Johnson, M. (2000, January). Linking
customer satisfaction to product design: A key to success for Volvo.
Quality Management Journal, 7(1), 27-38.
Haythornthwaite, C., Kazmer, M. M., Robins, J. and Showmaker, S. (2000,
September). Community development among distance learners. Journal
of Computer-Mediated Communication, 6(1).
Hearn, G. and Scott, D. (1998, September). Students staying home. Futures,
30(7), 731-737.
Hogan, D. and Kwiatkowksi, R. (1998, November). Emotional aspects of large
group teaching. Human Relations, 51(11), 1403-1417.
Hora, N. and Kling, R. (2001). Students’ distress with a Web-based distance
education course: An ethnographic study of participants’ experiences.
Information, Communication & Society, 3(4), 557-579.
Institute for Higher Education Policy. (2000). Quality on the line: Benchmarks
for Success in Internet Distance Education. Washington, D.C.
Kerlinger, F. N. (1986). Foundations of Behavioral Research. 3rd ed. New
York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Kim, J. and Mueller, C. W. (1986). Introduction to Factor Analysis. Beverly
Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
Kirkman, B. L., Rosen, B., Gibson, C. B., Etsluk, P. E. and McPherson, S. (2002,
August). Five challenges to virtual team success: Lessons from Sabre, Inc.
The Academy of Management Executives, 16(3).
Kline, P. (1993). The Handbook of Psychological Testing. London: Routledge.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Looking for Indicators of Success for Distance Education
159
Kling, R. (2000). Learning about information technologies and social change:
The contribution of social informatics. Information Society, 16(3), 217232.
Martz, B. and Shepherd, M. (2002, July). Using the influence level of information
to explain the non-consensus process loss. Group Decision and Negotiation, 11(4).
McGrath, J. E. (1984). Dilemetics: The study of research choices and dilemmas.
In J. E. McGrath, J. Martin and R. A. Kulka (Eds.), Judgment Calls in
Research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
Moore, M. G. (1995). American Distance Education: A short literature review.
In F. Lockwood (Ed.), Open and Distance Learning Today. New York:
Routledge.
Noble, D. F. (1999). Digital Diploma Mills. Retrieved November 28, 2002 from
the World Wide Web: http://www.firstmonday.dk/issues/issue3_1/noble/
index.html.
Nunamaker, Jr., J. F., Dennis, A. R., Valacich, J. S., Vogel, D. R. and George,
J. F. (1991). Electronic meeting systems to support group work. Communications of the ACM, 34, 42-58.
Nunally, J. (1978). Psychometric Theory. New York: McGraw-Hill
Pallof, R. & Pratt, K. (1999). Building Learning Communities in Cyberspace:
Effective Strategies for the Online Classroom. San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
Peters, T. J. and Waterman, Jr., R. H. (1982). In Search of Excellence. New
York: Harper and Row.
Polanyi, M. (1966). The Tacit Dimension. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.
Poole, M. S. and DeSanctis, G. (1990). Understanding the Use of Group
Decision Support Systems: The Theory of Adaptive Structuration. In J.
Fulk and C. Steinfeld (Eds.), Organizations and Communication Technology. New Bury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Ragan, L. C. (1998). Good Teaching is Good Teaching. Retrieved from the
World Wide Web: www.ed.psu.edu/acsde.
Russell, T. (2001). Retrieved January 12, 2001 from the World Wide Web: http:/
/nova.teleeducation.nb.ca/nosignificantdifference/.
Shepherd, M. M., Martz, B., Ferguson, J. and Klein, G. (2002, June). A Survey
of Distance Education Programs. In Conference Proceedings of EDINEB
IX, Guadalaraj, Mexico.
Statsoft. (2002). Retrieved November 30, 2002 from the World Wide Web: http:/
/www.statsoftinc.com/textbook/stfacan.html.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
160 Martz, Reddy and Sangermano
Svetcov, D. (2000). The virtual classroom vs. the real one. Forbes, 50-52.
TeleEducation, NB. (2001). Retrieved January 12, 2001 from the World Wide
Web: http://teleeducation.nb.ca/anygood/.
Tinto, V. (1975). Leaving College. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Tu, C. (2000). Online learning migration: From social learning theory to social
presence theory in the CMC environment. Journal of Network and
Computer Applications, 23, 27-37.
Tucker, L. F. and MacCallum, R. (1997). Unpublished manuscript. Retrieved
November 30, 2002 from the World Wide Web: available at http://
quantrm2.psy.ohio-state.edu/maccallum/book/ch6.pdf.
US News and World Report. (2001, October). Best Online Graduate Programs.
Vavra, T. G. (2002, May). ISO 9001:2000 and customer satisfaction. Quality
Progress, 35(5), 69-75.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Looking for Indicators of Success for Distance Education
161
Appendix A Distance Education Questionnaire*
You may receive multiple copies of this questionnaire. Please, complete only
once.
Demographic: No course instructor will see the individual results associated
with your name. Please answer the questions honestly so that the results can be
relied upon as we make several important decisions regarding improving the
UCCS distance program. Please identify one of the courses completed as your
Reference Course. If this is your first course, list it as the Reference Course.
When a question refers to a “course” please keep your Reference Course in
mind.
Q1. Sex: [ ] M [ ] F
Q2. Reference Course: _____
Q2b. Student Type: _____
Q2c. Grade _____
Q3. How many distance courses have you completed (do not count those in
which you are currently enrolled but have not completed)?
___ courses (0 if first)
Q4. The amount of time per week, I expected to spend on the course:
[ ] 0-2 hrs [ ] 2-4 hrs [ ] 4-7 hrs [ ] 7-10 hrs [ ] 10+ hrs
Q5. The amount of time per week, I did spend on the course:
[ ] 0-2 hrs [ ] 2-4 hrs [ ] 4-7 hrs [ ] 7-10 hrs [ ] 10+ hrs
Class Features: On a scale of Strongly Disagree (SD) to Strongly Agree (SA),
please rate the following class features.
Class Features
Q6 E-mail was effectively used
Q7 Forum (class wide) was effectively used
Q8 Forum (group wide) was effectively used
Q9 Online timed tests were effectively used
Q10 Team/group projects were effectively used
Q11 Announcements were effectively used
Q12 Phone calls from professor were effectively used
Q13 Electronic gradebook was effectively used
Q14 Fax/postal service was effectively used
Q15 Other:
Used
(Y/N)
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Rating (circle one)
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
SA
SA
SA
SA
SA
SA
SA
SA
SA
SA
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
162 Martz, Reddy and Sangermano
Survey: On a scale of Strongly Disagree (SD) to Strongly Agree (SA), please
rate the following statements based upon your personal experience and opinion.
Statement
Q16 I was satisfied with the content of the course
Q17 The tests were fair assessments of my knowledge
Q18 I would take another distance course with this professor
Q19 I would take another distance course
Q20 The course workload was fair
Q21 The amount of interaction with the professor and other students was what I
expected
Q22 The course used groups to help with learning
Q23 I would have liked to have had more interaction with the professor
Q24 Overall, I was satisfied with the course
Q25 I spent more time than expected on this course
Q26 The course content was valuable to me personally
Q27 The communication technology (Internet ISP, forum, modem, Jones system)
did not disrupt the course
Q28 Grading was fair
Q29 Distance instructors are more lenient than on campus instructors
Q30 Often I felt “lost” in the distance class
Q31 The class instructions were explicit
Q32 I “stayed current” with the reading assignments
Q33 Feedback from the instructor was timely
Q34 I received personalized feedback from the instructor
Q35 I am very comfortable with using computers: Internet, upload/download of
files, Word, Excel, and PowerPoint
Q36 I would have learned more if I had taken this class on-campus (as opposed
to online)
Q37 This course made me think critically about the issues covered
Q38 I think technology (e-mail, Web, discussion forums) was utilized effectively
in this class
Q39 I felt that I could customize my learning more in the distance format
Q40 I would call myself an introvert
Q41 AACSB accreditation was important to my choosing this program
Q42 The course content was valuable to me professionally
Q43 I missed the interaction of a “live,” traditional classroom
Q44 I made friends in the course that I continue to communicate with
Q45 The reputation of UCCS was important to me in choosing this program
Q46 Overall, the program is a good value (quality/cost)
Q47 I participated more in this Reference Course than I have/had in traditional
(on campus) courses
Q48 I chose the UCCS distance MBA because it does not have a campus
attendance requirement
Q49 The technical support provided by Jones was good (leave unanswered if you
never used technical support)
Comments:
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
Rating (circle one)
D N A SA
D N A SA
D N A SA
D N A SA
D N A SA
D N A SA
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
D
D
D
D
D
D
N
N
N
N
N
N
A
A
A
A
A
A
SA
SA
SA
SA
SA
SA
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
SA
SA
SA
SA
SA
SA
SA
SA
SD
D
N
A
SA
SD
SD
D
D
N
N
A
A
SA
SA
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
SA
SA
SA
SA
SA
SA
SA
SA
SA
SD
D
N
A
SA
SD
D
N
A
SA
* Note: The question numbers (along with variables “Q2b Student Type ___ Q2c Grade ____”)
are added for reference purposes.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Online Assessment in Higher Education
163
Chapter VIII
Online Assessment
in Higher Education:
Strategies to
Systematically Evaluate
Student Learning
Elizabeth A. Buchanan
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, USA
Abstract
This chapter acknowledges the challenges surrounding assessment
techniques in online education at the higher education level. It asks
specifically, “How do we know our online students are learning?” To get
closer to answering this question with confidence, various strategies
ranging from participation techniques to online group work, peer and selfassessment, and journals and portfolios are described. The role of online
mentoring as a supplementary strategy is also introduced. The chapter
concludes with a survey of advantages and disadvantages of the various
strategies.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
164 Buchanan
Introduction: What Are Our Students
Learning?
How do we know our students are learning? That is one of the most challenging
questions facing educators in all levels of formal schooling, from elementary to
higher education to training; assessing what learning is taking place proves to be
a demanding task for all involved. On a continuum, we have such mechanisms
as standardized tests on one extreme to looking at our students’ faces on the
other to ascertain whether “learning” is occurring. Over the years, various types
of assessment models have been developed, each purporting to measure learning
“better” and more authentically than its predecessor and, yet, whether we can
still affirmatively answer than age-old question, “Are my students learning”
remains elusive. Schunk is correct in noting, “assessing learning is difficult
because we do not observe it directly but rather we observe its products or
outcomes” (2000, p. 7). That is, learning itself is not quantifiable or tangible —
we see test scores, read papers, and observe discussions, all of which supposedly
gauge something happening between student and content. What that something
may be is debatable. When we add to this ambiguity the complexities of online
education, we have many issues and challenges to consider vis-à-vis student
learning.
In higher education today, for a variety of reasons, distance education in the form
of online or Web-based delivery has taken root as a popular, cost-effective, and
pedagogically sound process of teaching and learning. Numerous studies over
the years have sought to affirm that distance education is equally as effective
(why not better?) as face-to face learning. Many studies have oftentimes
concluded with the “no significant difference” phenomena, suggesting that there
is no difference in the learning outcomes that occur in a distance environment
versus on-site. That may be so, and our students may be “learning” all the same,
but regardless of environment, a good educator will want to know what his or her
students are learning and how do they process the information and learning
objects from a course into knowledge. The good educator will want to know
“what works” and why? Moreover, the good online educator will want to know
how to best use the online environment to promote student learning and how to
adapt old strategies and adopt new strategies to foster online learning. To get at
the root of these questions, we must assess assessment strategies themselves in
online environments. Are we looking at the right things to assess our students in
online coursework? Are we as instructors asking the right questions? Are we
engaging our students in the right activities?
This chapter will look at strategies to employ in assessing students in higher
education level, Web-based coursework, though this author believes some of
these apply to higher-level secondary schooling, as well. Some of these strateCopyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Online Assessment in Higher Education
165
gies work equally as well in on-site environments, too, and can be used with
confidence in a variety of educational settings. This chapter does not address
training in particular, however.
It is important to realize that when discussing assessment, discipline-specific
perspectives are significant and can render any general discussion of assessment
irrelevant. Readers are encouraged to pursue research in their disciplines
regarding subject-specific assessment techniques. The goals of this chapter are
to present a general discussion of assessment in online environments for
instructors new to the online classroom, while moving educators closer to
understanding and valuing student learning in online environments. The strategies described herein are intentionally devoid of a disciplinary context.
Assessing in Online Environments
We hear, all too often, about failures in education: failing test scores, illiteracy,
social promotion, etc. And, we as educators may unfortunately have experienced
failures in our classrooms, online or on-site, to some degree. What constitutes
failure? Student grades? Student attrition? Student inability to understand or
process information into knowledge? Students not knowing what we think they
are supposed to know?
This last failure, in particular, is common in online learning for a variety of
reasons: the disparate spaces of students and instructors often contributes to
misunderstandings, technological failures or mishaps which contribute to student
distress (Hara and Kling, 2001), poor instructional design so that students
become lost or confused within a Web course environment (Berge et al., 2000)
and, a mismatch between course and learning objectives to their assessment.
Rogers (2000, p. 5) states: “… matching goals and objectives to assessment is
good practice … the problem many teachers have is keeping the goals and the
skills you taught to meet the goals, and how students’ progress through the
materials is related to assessment. Many times, assessment instruments do not
measure what was actually taught.”
Assessment can, and should, propel the design of an online course. By first
asking two fairly simple questions, “What do I want students to learn in this
course?” and “What types of learning activities will contribute to this?,” online
instructors are off to a good start. These two questions are interrelated with a
larger issue: the instructor’s pedagogical beliefs and perspectives. We have
heard over and over in the distance education literature that the instructor’s role
changes from the sage on the stage to that of an active contributor, or guide, more
in line with constructivist theories of education. Regardless of the formal theory
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
166 Buchanan
one believes in, it is important for instructors to consider what they believe about
teaching and learning. We can come to understand our pedagogies better and
ultimately teach better by systematically investigating questions of teaching and
learning. One way of promoting such systematic investigation is through an
ongoing, constant evaluation of aims and objectives. This can be done at both the
micro (lesson or weekly) and macro (course in general) levels. Online education,
in particular, can facilitate this type of flexibility and openness to revision by its
very nature.
When considering online assessment, one must reflect on instructional design,
what to include in the course and how to present it. Berge, Collins and Dougherty
(2000, p. 34) claim that, “instructional design focuses on analyzing what the
course learning objectives are and how to best present them to students.” Design
principles must take into account the necessary elements requisite to an online
environment: syllabus, schedule (or what Berge et al. call “administrivia”),
lectures (in text, graphic, or video format), readings, discussion boards, synchronous chat function, quiz or test tool (if relevant), and additional resources or
materials. These elements should be structured logically and easy for students
to find and use. Rogers (2002) suggests designing not for the ideal, but for the
reality of your situation, suggesting that to a great extent, online course design
should be considered on a case-by-case basis. Additionally, “Material should be
presented in such a way that it is compatible with a number of learning styles.
Visual learners benefit most from charts, maps, filmstrips, notes and flashcards.
Auditory learners benefit most from tapes, videos, lectures, notes, and recitation. Tactile learners benefit most from writing repetition, construction and
display projects, note taking, analogy, and study sheets. Consider all three styles
when designing course material and activities” (Madden, 1999).
The main goal of course design is to facilitate a learning environment where
students can engage with the materials and course content in a meaningful way.
Certain assessment strategies can promote this engagement extremely well.
Options in Online Assessment Strategies
By systematically examining issues of teaching and learning in online environments, instructors can develop meaningful assessment mechanisms that are fair
and worthwhile. That is, they will tell us what we want to know about our
students’ learning. Assessment, in any environment, must be systematically
applied and consistent. Instructors are encouraged to provide students with a
detailed discussion of the assessment tools used and the philosophies behind
those tools, so students understand why certain assessment mechanisms are in
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Online Assessment in Higher Education
167
place. By understanding the types of assessments, students may see more
clearly what is expected of them and how they are to achieve course and learning
objectives.
Unfortunately, all too often, students receive little more than a grade or a number,
and these marks do not encourage students to engage more deeply in their
learning pursuits. Feedback from instructors in online environments is even more
important than in onsite coursework, to avoid students’ sense of isolation,
confusion, and apathy toward faceless and far-removed instructors and peers.
The following strategies encourage active relationships among students and
instructors that provide different perspectives on learning. While tests and
quantitative measures are, indeed, useful and have a place in online education,
these strategies promote a more systematic investigation into learning that allow
us to better answer that age-old question, “Are my students learning?” These
strategies, too, however, require considerable commitment from instructors, but
achieve the types of learning environment where one can know with greater
certainty that students are learning.
Participation
Many Web courses rely on participation as a major component of assessment.
A major problem arises when “participation” is not clearly defined or articulated.
Instructors should provide guidelines as to their expectations of participation: Is
it a quantitative measure? Qualitative? Both? Is participation simply fulfilling
weekly assignments? Is it responding to other messages to continue a discussion
theme? To simply state, “participate by commenting on the readings or discussion
postings” is inadequate. If the instructor stops and considers, “What do I want
to achieve by having students comment on the readings or participate on the
discussion board?” or “What do I want students to get out of the readings?,”
participation will be redefined and refocused in a meaningful manner.
Typically, participation takes place in the form of discussion through asynchronous tools, such as bulletin boards. It is very important for instructors to consider
the use of discussion, as Muilenburg and Berge (2002, p. 104) describe: “Does
online discussion make sense? Is the discussion method a good match for the
overall goals and objectives of the course, for the content, and for the learners?
If the answer to any of these is ‘no,’ then you can spend all of your time … with
disappointing results. Use online discussion only when it makes a valuable
contribution to the desired outcomes of the course … .”
This instructor has found a useful approach to participation in the form of peer
citations. Of particular interest, the asynchronous nature of online courses allows
peer citation to be a valuable strategy in promoting meaningful participation.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
168 Buchanan
Students can receive credit for citing others in their postings and assignments, as
well as receive credit for being cited. Just as in peer-reviewed research where
citations are valued, so should they be in online coursework. A reciprocal
relationship grows out of the peer citation strategy, in that students strive to do
their best work in order to be cited, and students respond enthusiastically to
readings and discussions, looking for the best citations they can find.
Portfolios and Journals
Portfolios and journals are both reflective collections. Portfolios are collections
of student work over time and can include such things as excerpts from a learning
journal, papers, exams, in-class writing, online discussion postings, peer assessments, and the like, while journals, more specifically focus on students’ impressions, feelings, thoughts, actions, surprises, frustrations, etc., to the class or
learning situation. In the learning context, however, both reflect a learner’s
experience in a classroom. The North Central Regional Educational Laboratory
(2002) says of portfolios, “Portfolios of student performance and products have
gained support from educators, who view them as a way to collect evidence of
a student’s learning. For many educators, portfolios are an attractive alternative
to more traditional assessment methods.” In particular, journals and portfolios
are extremely useful tools for gauging student progress, as they are longitudinal
and, thus, reveal changes over time (usually throughout a semester). They do,
however, require a substantial commitment on the part of both students and the
instructor. Students must think carefully about their learning experience that day
or that week, articulate their reactions, and spend time reviewing previous entries
to see how they are progressing as learners. Also, on the instructor side, time
spent reading and responding to student entries is significant. Portfolios or
journals are only useful as learning assessments if the instructor commits to
creating a dialogue with the students by asking questions of the entries,
challenging assumptions, raising awareness, and so on, through the process. The
learning journal is an interactive and “living” piece of assessment. Instructors,
with extremely heavy student loads can, however, choose to sample student
entries, which still allow an instructor to engage with the student sufficiently, but
avoids the burnout of reading and responding to too many student entries.
Such tools have the potential to become invaluable if the students are not
documenting their learning experience “correctly.” As with other assessment
techniques, journals in particular require explanation and guidance — students
must be given guidelines to avoid “missing the point” in their entries. Brookfield
(1995) has provided these prompts, which can be modified for use in an online
environment:
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Online Assessment in Higher Education
169
•
At what moment in class did you feel the most engaged with what was
happening?
•
At what moment in class did you feel most distanced or disconnected from
what was happening?
•
What action or incident that the instructor or other student took in class did
you find the most helpful?
•
What action or incident that the instructor or other student took in class did
you find the most confusing?
•
What happened in class this week that surprised you the most? (Brookfield,
1995)
This instructor has used these prompts in a hybrid course environment, and
included such questions as:
•
What role did the online portions of course play for you as a learner this
week?
•
•
•
Did the technology used impact you negatively or positively?
Did the technology used this week inhibit or enhance your role as a learner?
How did the technology impact your relationship with your peers this week?
By providing such guidelines, students have a starting point from which to
evaluate their learning process. As noted, unique disciplines will want to ask
particular questions to assess learning related to the subject matter in their own
ways.
Self-Assessment
Related to portfolio or journal use is the technique of self-assessment, yet
portfolios or journals are but two tools where students can self-assess. The use
of self-assessment is a significant technique in online education and fits with the
pedagogical specificity of Web-based learning in general by “shifting roles from
audience to actors” (Cavanaugh, 2002, p. 183). Because students are “alone,”
self-assessment can promote more active engagement with the course than
simply sitting back and awaiting a grade from one’s instructor. Students must be
comfortable with the idea of self-assessment, as it fails if students cannot be
honest with themselves and the instructor. Schunk (2000, p. 379) advocates using
self-assessment early in formal education, as early as preschool and kindergarten. He notes, “developing self-evaluation strategies helps students gain control
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
170 Buchanan
over their learning. This, in turn, allows them to focus more effort in studying
those areas where they need more time.”
In short, with self-assessment, we are asking students to determine where they
are as learners vis-à-vis some content. This is not always an easy task, for
students may not know what they don’t know, of course. To help alleviate this
problem, the instructor must provide checklists, rubrics, or inventories to help
students assess themselves. For disciplines more used to quantitative measures,
pretests or practice tests can serve as means of self-assessment where discrete
answers must be achieved.
Self-assessment must be guided by clear objectives. Students cannot adequately
assess themselves if they are unclear about the goals and objectives of the lesson
or content. Here, again, it is imperative for the instructor to articulate what he
or she wants students to gain from a particular exercise or reading. Students’
self-assessment also creates a dialogue with instructors whereby they can
modify or revise their teaching. Self-assessment, as a formal assessment
technique, opens the door to a more fluid teaching and learning environment,
which coincides nicely with the structure of online environments.
Peer-Assessment and Group Work
The use of peer assessment usually raises fear among students, who are afraid
of facing their friends the next week in class after issuing someone a bad grade.
In online environments, part of this fear is minimized by the disparate nature of
the students in Web-based courses, raising the utility of this assessment
technique. Yet, because of this dynamic, another potential problem with peer
assessment is the likelihood of inflated grades — no one wants to be known as
the guy who gives harsh grades to his online friends, after all, so a higher-thandeserved grade may be issued. Whether individuals are harsher in virtual
environments is debatable. Peer assessment does, however, have the ability to
encourage students to strive harder to complete assignments and participate
more actively if they know their peers are grading them. Thus, by its very nature,
peer assessment may raise the bar of student engagement.
Peer assessment online can take shape in a number of ways. Students can assess
each other’s participation in online discussions, both synchronous and asynchronous, on assignments, and on group projects. (Group work will be discussed
momentarily.)
Burgess and The Learning and Teaching Support Network (n.d.) suggests using
the following points in peer assessment:
•
It is best for students to make comments about their own strengths and
weaknesses before hearing/receiving other people’s views.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Online Assessment in Higher Education
171
•
•
Identify strengths of work first, before moving on to areas for improvement.
•
Give feedback based on concrete behavior/examples rather than giving a
general impression.
•
Back up comments with evidence.
•
Make sure the feedback can be clearly understood.
Try to make comments descriptive rather than evaluative.
Instructors must be actively involved with peer assessment as well. They do not
merely drop out of the learning experience and allow their students to complete
the grading tasks. The instructor’s role of the mediator takes effect with peer
assessment, as he or she must first provide guidance to the students as to
assessment criteria and then work with both the assessor and the assessed to be
sure the assessment was fair and systematic. Peer assessment takes time to
work extremely well in online classes and novice instructors should use this with
some caution. Students must receive “training” on peer assessment. For valuable
guidance, see Boud, Cohen and Sampson (2001).
Peer assessment becomes extremely valuable in group work. Typically, two
major problems surround the use of group work: (1) given their many responsibilities of job, family, and school, it is difficult for students to find time to meet in
groups outside of class, and (2) students are leery of having their individual
grades dependent upon the abilities and efforts of others.
While online students will typically not meet synchronously and physically due to
their disparate locales, they will be meeting electronically, through email or
discussion forums. Students must worry, in this scenario, of nonresponsive
peers. This instructor has heard student complaints about the frustrations of
trying to contact other students via email or within course modules, only to be
ignored. The second concern is quite valid for both online and onsite environments. Students complain that someone invariably fails to contribute equally or
fairly. To prevent this, when using group work online, students should use peer
assessment. Then, when a group member is unresponsive, the rest of the group
need not worry that their grade will reflect this person’s apathy because they, in
fact, can control their own fate through peer assessment. Because peer
assessment requires guidance from instructors, evaluation forms or checklists
should be provided to students.
A simple evaluation form could include:
1.
_____ participated actively in our group planning.
Yes
2.
No
_____ was willing to offer suggestions for our group work.
Yes
No
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
172 Buchanan
3.
_____ was prepared for our group’s working session.
Yes
No
4.
_____ did his/her share of the work (typing, taking notes, etc.)
5.
I feel _____ contributed poorly/ adequately/ superiorly to my group.
6.
On a scale of 1-5, with 1 being the lowest and 5 the highest, _____ deserves
a _____ for his/her work in the group.
7.
Think of a pie. You must slice up the pie based on the contributions of each
member, with the biggest contributor getting the most pie. List each group
member with a percentage of the pie. Be sure to include yourself in the
slices.
These aforementioned strategies are a starting point for online instructors
interested in gauging student learning in different ways. They do, as noted,
require substantial effort on the part of both the instructor and the students, but,
in the long run, provide excellent data to document student learning.
Online Mentoring
Online mentoring is not a direct assessment strategy, but another means through
which the student experience, student progress, and learning itself, can be
gauged. Buchanan (2002) has suggested that online programs include a peer
mentoring network. The idea is simple: Students entering online programs are
matched with an advanced distance education student. Registration personnel or
advising staff within a department or school can facilitate the exchange of names
and e-mail addresses. The mentor and the mentee can communicate at their own
convenience and on their own terms. How does this promote learning or the
assessment of learning? In the general sense, institutions can gain knowledge
about the student experience by offering the mentor and the mentee short
surveys inquiring about the mentor relationship and what it contributed to each
individual. How does it help a novel online student assimilate to the online
environment? Will such a relationship help minimize student attrition? In the more
specific sense of student learning, instructors can inquire of the mentor his or her
perspective on his or her mentee’s progress in courses. The mentor will have the
responsibility to ask basic questions of the mentee regarding his or her work in
specific courses: What learning strategies are being used in these courses? How
are mentees responding to these strategies? Basically, the mentor is getting a
clean look at how individuals respond to various assessment tools and sharing this
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Online Assessment in Higher Education
173
information with those responsible for promoting learning — the instructors
themselves.
Online peer mentoring is a valuable and straightforward process that can
contribute greatly to what Maki (2002) calls institutional curiosity:
Institutional curiosity seeks answers to questions about which students
learn, what they learn, how well they learn, when they learn, and explores
how pedagogies and educational experiences develop and foster student
learning. When institutional curiosity drives assessment, faculty and
professional staff across an institution raise these kinds of questions and
jointly seek answers to them, based on the understanding that students’
learning and development occur over time both inside and outside of the
classroom.
Summary of Strategies and Advantages/
Disadvantages
This figure summarizes some of the existent advantages and disadvantages to
the strategies discussed. It is noteworthy that the same point can be considered
both simultaneously a pro and a con, depending on one’s environment and nature
of the course in particular. It is imperative that the instructor of an online course
monitors and engages in the assessment techniques very closely to avoid the
emergence of some of these disadvantages.
Conclusion
Ultimately, as Angelo (1999, n.p.) asserts, “Assessment efforts have resulted in
little learning improvement because they have been implemented without a clear
vision of what ‘higher’ or ‘deeper’ learning is and without an understanding or
how assessment can promote such a vision … we need a vision worth working
toward … we need a different concept of assessment itself, a new mental model
… and we need research-based guidelines for effective assessment practice
that will increase the odds of achieving more productive instruction and more
effective learning.” Online education provides us with many opportunities to
implement novel and innovative assessment strategies. As with any good online
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
174 Buchanan
Figure 1.
Strategy
Online participation
Advantages
Can be quantified
Can be analyzed for
intellectual synthesis
Can encourage higher
quality work and deeper
engagement with course
materials
Disadvantages
Can be quantified
Can be time intensive for
instructor and students if
not appropriately defined
and explained
Portfolios and journals
Show progression over
time (longitudinal)
Large amounts of data
Promotes engagement
and reflection
Students can demonstrate
learning in a number of
ways through
portfolio/journal content
Can facilitate greater
dialogue between student
and instructor
Self-assessment
Greater autonomy and
sense of control exerted
by student
Ability to see where one
needs to improve
Facilitates dialogue
between student and
instructor on student
level
Instructor must be clear
in articulating goals and
objectives to students
May encourage students
to work harder to “face”
their peers
Can create a more
collegial environment
Enables instructor to
facilitate and oversee
learning process among
the students
Typical university
semester structure may be
too short to see change
longitudinally)
Instructors not knowing
what parts reveal
“learning”
Time intensive with large
classes
Impetus on instructor to
provide clear and
articulate guidelines
Possibility of students
missing the point of the
exercise
Students may be more
concerned with letter
grade than learning
process
Students may not know
what they don’t know
Instructor must provide
guidelines/rubric
Instructor must be clear in
articulating goals and
objectives to students
Peer-assessment and group
work
Possibility of grade
inflation OR
Possibility of harsher
grading
Can create a more hostile
environment
Possibility of unfair and
inequitable distribution of
work and tasks if peer
grading on group work is
not used
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Online Assessment in Higher Education
175
course, the instructor must prepare ahead of time, be ready to revise and respond
to students, and be ready to make a sound commitment to the learning
experience. As educators, we must rise to the challenge to provide true learning
opportunities for all.
References
Angelo, T. (1999). Doing assessment as if learning matters most. Retrieved
November 27, 2002 from the World Wide Web: http://www.aahe.org/
bulletin/angelomay99.htm.
Berge, Z., Collins, M. and Dougherty, K. (2000). Design guidelines for webbased courses. In B. Abbey (Ed.), Instructional and Cognitive Impacts
of Web-Based Education, pp. 32-40. Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing.
Boud, D., Cohen, R. and Sampson, J. (2001). Peer Learning in Higher
Education: Learning From & With Each Other. London: Kogan Page.
Brookfield, S. (1995). Becoming a Critically Reflective Teacher. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.
Buchanan, E. (2002). (2002). Institutional and library services for distance
education courses and programs. In R. Discenza, C. Howard and K. D.
Schenk (Eds.), The Design and Management of Effective Distance
Learning Programs, pp. 141-154. Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing.
Burgess, H. and Social Policy and Social Work/Learning and Teaching Support
Network (LTSN). (n.d.). Self and peer assessment. Retrieved January
5, 2003 from the World Wide Web: http://www.swap.ac.uk/learning/
Assessment2.asp.
Cavanaugh, C. (2002). Distance education quality: Success factors for resources, practices, and results. In R. Discenza, C. Howard and K. D.
Schenk (Eds.), The Design and Management of Effective Distance
Learning Programs, pp. 171-189. Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing.
Hara, N. and Kling, R. (2001). Student distress in web-based distance education.
EDUCAUSE Quarterly Articles, (3), 68-69.
Madden, D. (1999). 17 elements of good online courses. Retrieved January
5, 2003 from the World Wide Web: http://www.hcc.hawaii.edu/intranet/
committees/FacDevCom/guidebk/online/web-elem.htm.
Maki, P. (2002). Developing an assessment plan to learn about student learning.
Journal of Academic Librarianship, 28(1/2), 8-14.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
176 Buchanan
Muilenburg, L. and Berge, Z. (2002). Designing discussion for the online
classroom. In P. Rogers (Ed.), Designing Instruction for TechnologyEnhanced Learning, pp. 100-113. Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing.
North Central Regional Educational Laboratory. (2002). Self-assessment in
portfolios. Retrieved January 5, 2003 from the World Wide Web: http://
www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/students/learning/lr2port.htm.
Rogers, P. (2002). Teacher-Designers: How teachers use instructional design
in real classrooms. In P. Rogers (Ed.), Designing Instruction for Technology-Enhanced Learning, pp. 1-18. Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing.
Schunk, D. (2000). Learning Theories: An Educational Perspective. Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Assessing the Impact of Internet Testing: Lower Perceived Performance
177
Chapter IX
Assessing the Impact
of Internet Testing:
Lower Perceived
Performance
Wm. Benjamin Martz, Jr.
University of Colorado at Colorado Springs, USA
Morgan M. Shepherd
University of Colorado at Colorado Springs, USA
Abstract
This chapter provides the results of a comparison between two sections of
a graduate programming class, where one was an on-campus class and the
other, a distance class. The course content, instructor, syllabus, lecture
materials, notes, assessments and semester (time of year) were the same.
Both groups were surveyed to test their satisfaction with the testing
procedure and with their perception of certain aspects of the social
environment. The results showed differences in perceived test performance.
Two conjectures about possible causes underlying the difference and
suggestions for possible future research end the discussion.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
178 Martz and Shepherd
Introduction
Distance education is big business; over 1.6 million students enroll in distance
education classes annually. The Institute of Higher Education (2000) predicts
that by 2004 over 90% of all two and four-year colleges will offer some sort of
online courses. By the end of 2003, the virtual education market will grow in
excess of $21 billion (Svetcov, 2000). New technologies and improvements in
networking capabilities are enabling distance education instructors to come
closer to providing the traditional learning environment for their students.
However, there are still many issues that need to be resolved and, according to
recent research studies, it does not appear that these will be resolved anytime
soon.
Interestingly, the research in distance education goes back to the late 20’s when
the first studies were published comparing the test scores of students in a
classroom to their counterparts in a correspondence course (Crump, 1928).
Since then, hundreds of journal articles, studies and reports have been published
with similar comparisons with TV, radio, video tapes, computer-based training,
audio-conferencing, groupware, and now the Internet, representing the technology compared to the traditional classroom (Moore, 1995).
Much of the research compares the distance education approach to the
traditional classroom approach, looking for areas where the results from the
distance education approach equals or exceeds those from the traditional
classroom approach. There are many confounds involved, making this type of
research difficult. One of these confounds is the definition given to “distance
education.” These definitions range from correspondence courses, to satellite
classrooms where the instructor travels to lecture to a group of students meeting
face-to-face, to courses that are held via e-mail, to courses that are held via twoway full motion video with other technological support. The definition debate will
probably never end, as some definitions do not include the use of any technology
(correspondence courses), while others require several technologies to be
implemented (full motion video with chat rooms, list-servers and e-mail). For the
purpose of this study, our definition of distance education involves a student body
who never see each other or the instructor, who communicate via e-mail, phone
or chat, and who hand in assignments via e-mail or via posting to a common work
group area.
Other confounds arise due to the nature of the dependent variables that are
studied and the interaction affects between them. Some of the dependent
variables studied have been student performance, student satisfaction, and
student retention. Within each of these three variables, socialization is thought
to play a significant role. For example, Kling (2000) defines the study of complex
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Assessing the Impact of Internet Testing: Lower Perceived Performance
179
issues around the interaction of information technologies with an institutional and
cultural perspective as “social informatics.” With the proliferation of the
Internet, distance education is becoming a legitimate arena for social informatics.
Kling’s definition guides us to look at social issues brought on by the use of the
Internet technology with education in general.
Other researchers (Shipley and Veroff, 1952; Papert, 1980; Hills and Francis,
1999) suggest that learning requires a social context to be effective. Bandura
(1977) relies heavily on the interaction of people with their environment in his
Social Learning Theory. Gunawardena and Little (1997) use results from their
study to conjecture that “social presence is a strong predictor of satisfaction” in
a computer-based environment. Tu (2000) goes even further by suggesting that
the main driver of learning is the “consciousness of another person in the
environment.” Each of these studies indicates the importance of social issues
in distance education. However, for each study that claims to show a significant
difference between the distance and the traditional classroom environment,
there seems to be one that claims to show that there is NO significant difference
between the two environments. TeleEducation NB has helped compiled two lists
of research with regard to distance education. Russell (2003) summarizes those
studies that found “no significant difference” between students in distance
education and students in traditional classroom environments. Those findings
demonstrating a significant difference are available through the TeleEducation
(2003) web site.
Some studies have found significant differences in favor of the distance learning
environment. For example, in a study on participation, Colorito (2001) found
online students participating more than traditional students. Neslar and Hanner
(2001) surveyed students from different nursing programs about their level of
socialization and were surprised to find online nursing students showed more
socialization characteristics than their peers in the traditional classroom environment. Gagne and Shepherd (2001) found online students less satisfied than their
peers in the traditional classroom with the availability of the instructor in a
distance environment. However, this does reinforce the importance of some type
of social interaction to distance education students. Maki et al. (2000) found
satisfaction with a lecture course to be lower for online students than for
traditional students. Chen et al. (1991) found that the attitudes of students in a
computer-based class were less positive than those attitudes from students in a
conventional classroom.
By design, much of distance education is a solitary experience. In this light,
Hogan and Kwiatkowski (1998) argue that the emotional aspects of teaching
large groups with technology have been ignored. Hearn and Scott (1998) concur
and suggest that before adopting technology for distance teaching, that technology must be able to address the social context of learning. This idea is somewhat
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
180 Martz and Shepherd
borne out by Hill and Francis’ (1999) work with Computer Based Training (CBT)
wherein they found that students were more successful in the CBT environment
when more social interaction occurred.
Several researchers suggest that there may be problems inherent with the
distance environment. The most bothersome may be student retention where
course drop out rates as high as 50% are reported (Carr, 2000). Brown and
Liedholm (2002) found that students in the virtual classroom performed worse
than their traditional counterparts on examinations. Without the hands-on
supervision inherent in the traditional environment, cheating and plagiarism take
on added concerns (Agger-Gupta, 2002).
Other social factors also are being examined. Kirkman et al. (2002) identified
two social factors, creating trust and the feeling of isolation, as key factors for
students to succeed in the distance environment. Hora and Kling (2002) research
and report on the concern that distance courses may create new anxiety and
stress for the student. Haythornthwaite et al. (2000) found that the distance
environment limited the number of social cues and, in turn, this limitation reduced
the participation found in a distance environment.
This study looks more closely at student satisfaction, specifically student
satisfaction with the testing process in our distance education program. To help
reduce the threat of cheating, all student tests are timed. A timer starts when
the student begins the test. The timer counts down the time and is clearly visible
in the corner of the screen. After the timer is started, the student can view the
questions and take the test. Should the timer expire, the student’s work up to that
point is automatically submitted.
One potential problem with this method is the increased stress that might arise.
Building on the work of Hora and Kling (2002) and Haythornthwaite et al. (2000),
we hypothesize that this stress comes from two sources. The first source is the
fear of not performing well. The second source is the fear of not performing as
well as your peers. Both fears exist in a traditional classroom, although the latter
fear may be somewhat lessened due to the fact that the student can receive some
visual clues as to how well they are doing compared to their peers.
In the traditional test-taking environment students get feedback from the other
students in the room. This feedback takes several forms. The first is in the form
of a pre-quiz, “working” of the room. Students ask each other how much they
studied for this quiz and how difficult or easy they think it will be. A second form
of feedback occurs during the actual taking of the test. In the role of a student,
suppose I see that time is running out and I’m only 75% of the way through the
quiz. If I notice that 90% of my peers are still taking the quiz I may realize that
at least we are all “tanking” this quiz together (misery loves company). This
socialization cue will help to dampen my fear. Yet another cue is in the form of
the post-quiz “working” of the room. Students get a chance to see how well the
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Assessing the Impact of Internet Testing: Lower Perceived Performance
181
others thought they did (albeit perceived performance) on the quiz. The distance
student does not have easy access to any of these socialization cues. Hence, we
decided to explore the effects of these socialization aspects on student satisfaction in the distance test-taking environment.
We hypothesized that due to this lack of socialization cues in the distance
education environment, the distance students would be less satisfied with their
performance on the quiz than the traditional classroom students. We devised the
following experiment to test this hypothesis.
The Research Study
Like many of the other studies discussed earlier, this research study was
undertaken to explore the possibility of differences between the traditional
classroom environment and the distance education environment (Figure 1).
However, the unit of analysis for this study is the common learning activity of test
taking. Most studies noted earlier use the complete course as the unit of study,
i.e., student performance over the span of an entire course. This study uses a
subset activity of a course, a test. The rationale of using this lower level of
granularity is that differences that may occur at the test level may well be
“washed out” when the aggregate unit of measure, the course, is used.
The subjects in this study were drawn from two Masters of Business Administration (MBA) level classes. Both classes were introductory information systems classes teaching Visual Basic© programming. One was offered through an
established distance program while the second was taught in a traditional
classroom. Both courses were offered in the same 16-week semester format, by
Figure 1. Research Design
Test Parameters
- Content
- Order of Content
- Complexity
- Timing in Course
- Instructor
- Assignments
Traditional
Class Environment
Comparison of Results
Actual Performance
Perceived Performance
Test Satisfaction
Study Habits
Perceived Time Pressure
Online
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
182 Martz and Shepherd
the same instructor, using the same book, same lecture material including slides,
same assignments and the same grading scale. The weekly assignments and
order of topics was the same. The distance class had nine students and the oncampus class had 10 students.
The actual test used in the study was the first test of the semester for both
classes. The distance class took the test using an automated, online testing
program provided by the course content package that was accessed over the
internet. The on-campus class took its test on paper. The tests had the same
questions with the same weights and the same order. The test was divided into
three sections so as to minimize the potential problems in the distance environment. Both environments imposed the same time limit. The online test automatically enforced the time limit, while a timer was used to enforce the on-campus
class time limit.
A 15-question questionnaire was developed using the themes of interest from
previous distance education research. Questions were developed to explore the
areas assumed to be fundamentally different between distance and traditional
classroom education. The questions were developed to look for potential
differences in actual performance, perceived performance, test satisfaction,
study habits, and time pressure.
In both cases, immediately after the test, the questionnaire was distributed to the
class members. The distance class received the questionnaire as an e-mail
attachment. All questionnaires were returned within three days. The on-campus
class filled out and turned in the questionnaire before leaving the classroom. All
students in both classes returned their questionnaires.
Results
The responses from the two groups were tabulated and are shown in Table 1. In
addition, Table 1 shows the significance of a statistical test, the Fisher Exact Test
(Siegel, 1958), comparing the results of the online students to the on-campus
students for each question.
The first important observation is that two of the questions (Q4 and Q12) show
a significant difference. Q4 hints at a social interaction difference between the
two groups. Clearly, online students do not want to take tests with other students
around, while the on-campus students seem to prefer to have other students
around.
Question 12 proves a little more interesting. Q12 shows that the two groups of
M.B.A. students report a significant difference in their satisfaction with their
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Assessing the Impact of Internet Testing: Lower Perceived Performance
183
Table 1. Comparison of Online to On-Campus Groups
Statement
Online
A
3
0
4
0
Q1. I felt a lot of time pressure in taking this test.
Q2. The time pressure helped me to perform well on this test.
Q3. I would have scored higher with more time for the test.
Q4. I prefer taking tests with my other classmates in a
traditional classroom.
Q5. I prefer taking tests by myself without other classmates in
6
the room.
Q6. The test was a fair way to evaluate how well I knew the
6
subject matter.
Q7. I studied for this test -- more than I usually do for tests.
0
Q8. I studied with others (study group, non-classmate, etc.) for
1
this test.
Q9. I prefer studying with others for tests.
3
Q10. I believe that I finished sooner than 50% of the others
2
taking this test.
Q11. I believe that I scored better than 50% of the others taking
2
this test.
Q12. Overall, I was satisfied with my performance on the
2
test.
Q13. Overall, I was satisfied with the format of the test.
6
Q14. I waited until the last possible time to turn my test in.
3
Q15. I studied between the sections of the test.
2
Non-Questionnaire Objective Measures
Correct Prediction of Position (CPP)
5
Correct Prediction of Score (CPS)
5
Actual Test Score -- ATS (average)
127
(1) Fisher’s Exact Test (2) Mann-Whitney Test - (Siegel, 1958)
D
6
9
5
9
On-Campus
A
D
2
8
2
8
1
9
6
4
Sign. (1)
.444
.263
.173
.008
3
3
7
.128
3
9
1
.360
9
8
1
0
9
10
.526
.474
6
7
2
5
8
5
.444
.220
7
5
5
.220
7
8
2
.019
3
6
7
8
1
0
2
9
10
.444
.249
.211
8
4
133
.259
.414
.211(2)
own performance. Remember, this is really perceived performance, as the
results were not yet returned in class or available online. This finding becomes
more noteworthy because the actual test scores were not significantly different.
Questions 1, 2 and 3 deal with the issue of time pressure. Did the two groups feel
pressure to complete the test? No, not really. Both groups disagreed that they felt
time pressure and they disagreed that the time pressure helped their performance. While not statistically significant, the results for Q3 show that more of
the online students would have preferred more time. Combined, these results
show that a time limit did not induce the feelings of pressure, but the online group
would better receive an extension of the time limit.
Questions 4 and 5 tried to determine differences in the social aspect of having
others in the room when taking the test. Certainly, being able to see when others
complete and hand in the test could induce comparisons. In turn, these comparisons, if negative, could induce higher levels of anxiety. The results of these
questions track well with what would be expected. Those students that have
chosen a distance education class report little interest in having other students
as a reference group and those choosing an on-campus environment like having
other students as reference.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
184 Martz and Shepherd
Question 6 asks directly for an assessment of the fairness of the test. Both groups
thought the test was a fair evaluation. This can be interpreted to mean that
neither the technology nor the test seemed to impact on the students’ perception
of fairness.
Questions 7, 8 and 9 concentrate on the students’ study habits. Questions 8 and
9 try to determine if there is a difference in a student’s preference for studying
with others. There was none. Question 7 was asked to see if there was any
difference in perceived difficulty of the test. Neither group studied more than
they normally do. This is significant for the online group, as it implies that they
did not envision the distance exam to be harder than what they were used to.
Questions 10 and 11 were designed to test for the potential social impacts of the
on-campus environment. As suspected, the on-campus students did better than
the distance students when they were asked to predict in which half, top half or
bottom half, of the class (1) they had completed and handed in their test, and (2)
they had scored. The on-campus students were very accurate with their
assessment of whether they turned their test in with the upper 50th percentile, or
the lower 50th percentile. Half estimated that they finished in the first 50th
percentile, and half estimated that they finished in the second 50th percentile.
This indicates that the social cues were providing significant feedback. It is also
interesting to note that their estimate as to whether they scored in the upper 50th
percentile or the lower 50 th percentile was 50-50.
Questions 12 and 13 deal with a student’s satisfaction. The first question looks
at his or her performance and the second asks about the format of the test. As
stated earlier, the perceived performance proved significantly different between
those students in the on-campus and those in the online class. This difference
does not carry through on Q13, as no difference was found related to the format
of the test.
Questions 14 and 15 compare each student’s behavior with respect to when they
handed in the test and to whether or not they studied between the sections of the
test. One could expect the on-campus students to wait until the last moment,
while the distance students do not. The results imply otherwise. Question 15 is
truly unique to the distance environment. It indicates that two students found it
necessary to study between the sections of the test.
Discussion
The first major limitation of this study is the sample size. With only 19 subjects
spread over two classes, any differences found between the two groups will be
sensitive to statistical prejudices. It should be noted that the Fisher Exact Test
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Assessing the Impact of Internet Testing: Lower Perceived Performance
185
used to designate any differences as significant is the appropriate test for
analyzing a two-by-two result. Also, it is a very conservative test, meaning that
if a significant difference is noted, it is more likely a true difference.
In the counter-argument, one that argues for the reliability of the results, many
of the typical confounds are not found in this study. For example, all subjects in
both classes returned the survey. The results represent the whole population and
not just a sample. Additionally, the courses were the same, the instructor was the
same, the MS PowerPoint© and lecture notes were the same, the grading was
the same and the test questions were in the same format and in the same order.
Notwithstanding the issues of a small sample size, the results still provide some
interesting discussion points. First, why would there be a difference in perceived
performance? A further analysis of the data did not find any of the other
questions (Q1 through Q15) significantly correlated to Q12. So, none of the
typical concerns looked at, such as “time pressure (Q1-Q3),” “fairness of the test
(Q6),” “study habits (Q7-Q9),” or “format of the test (Q13),” help us understand
the perceived performance difference exhibited.
However, one interpretation of Q10 and Q11 may provide a hint. While the
differences between the subjects in these two classes are not statistically
significant, it is interesting to note that the estimates of finishing position in the
on-campus class better match the actual results than do the estimates in the
distance class. This hints that the students in the on-campus class have a better
reference point. Obviously, they can see the other students handing in their
exams and compare their relative position. This reference point was not available
to the distance class. Could it be that the reference point provided in the
traditional classroom helps students understand their relative position and lead to
better “perceived satisfaction”? This might also explain the decidedly negative
impression that the distance students felt, concerning both whether they turned
in their test in the upper or lower 50th percentile and whether they scored in the
upper or lower 50th percentile.
The second area of interest is with time pressure. Again, without statistical
significance, this is conjecture only. The numbers for the time pressure questions
hint at time pressure impacting the online students more than the on-campus
students. This is especially true when a student was asked if they would have
scored higher with more time (Q3). The two groups had the same amount of time.
But, we need to realize that a key difference was the “enforcer” of the deadline.
In the distance case, the software counts down using a displayed clock and when
zero is reached, the software closes down the test and locks the student out. This
is a very rigid and impersonal activity in that there is no arguing with the
computer. In the classroom environment, the “enforcer” is a human being. A
student may feel it easier to push the time limit. Even as the instructor is saying,
“It is time to turn the tests in,” a student may feel comfortable finishing a
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
186 Martz and Shepherd
sentence. Extrapolating then, could it be that the “impersonalness” of the
automated testing environment influences perceived pressure?
The results raise one concern and provide two conjectures for understanding
differences between on-campus and distance environments. The concern is
about why online students would report lower perceived performance than oncampus students. Several keys factors suggested by the literature, such as test
fairness and study habits, did not help to explain the difference. However, one
conjecture consistent with the data is that an on-campus student has a built-in
reference group when handing in tests: those students that have already handed
the test in before them. The second conjecture consistent with the data is that
“time pressure” may be inherent to the distance testing environment simply
because the testing software is an impersonal enforcer of the time limit.
Lack of social cues may very well account for the more pessimistic attitudes of
the distance students, even though there was no significant difference on the test.
Now we need to look at various ways in which we can infuse the distance
education environment with similar social cues. One way may be to put an
“average time to complete quiz” number up on the screen for the distance
students when they start their quiz, along with a “you are the XXth person to take
this test” number so the students can better make sense out of the two. We may
need to hold a special chat session prior to the quiz to allow the distance students
to get some of these socialization cues. If we can infuse some portion of these
social cues into the distance environment, we may be able to improve the
satisfaction levels of the distance education students taking timed quizzes.
Conclusion
The distance education environment is big business. As such, there is much
interest in understanding any differences inherent between these environments
and traditional on-campus learning environments. The literature has a long list of
researchers concerned with understanding these differences. Many hard,
objective issues have been raised, such as performance, retention and participation. Lately, softer, subjective social issues, such as time pressure, anxiety,
stress, and trust have been thrown into the debate. All in all, the results have been
ambiguous. There are studies showing significant differences between the two
environments and there are studies showing no significant differences. The latter
imply that distance environment is “just as good” as the traditional environment.
The study reported here adds one more issue to the significant difference side
of the equation. Using two classes, equivalent on many of the confounding
variables, such as instructor, test format, time constraints, etc., data was
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Assessing the Impact of Internet Testing: Lower Perceived Performance
187
gathered on issues such as perceived performance, study habits, and actual
performance. The limitations of a small sample size notwithstanding, the results
show that the distance students rated their perceived performance significantly
lower than the on-campus students.
The attempt to interpret the implications of these findings suggested two
conjectures consistent with the data. One, the testing process in the distance
environment uses more of an impersonal enforcer of the time limit. As such, the
distance student may feel more time is needed and feel less positive about his or
her performance as the time limit runs out. Two, the on-campus environment
provides students with a built-in reference group for analyzing their performance. As students hand in tests, they “know” where they fall in relation to
others that have and have not yet handed in the test. Possible methods for adding
the reference group to distance classes and for removing the personal confound
from the on-campus environment were suggested.
The results of this study suggest one more area of concern for those looking to
implement a distance environment: students in distance environments may
exhibit lower perceived performance.
References
Agger-Gupta, D. (2002). Uncertain Frontiers: Exploring ethical dimensions of
online learning. In K. E. Rudestam and J. Schoenholtz-Read (Eds.),
Handbook of Online Learning. Sage Publishing.
Allen, M., Bourhis, J., Burrell, N. and Mabry, E. (2002). Comparing student
satisfaction with distance education to traditional classrooms in higher
education: A meta analysis. American Journal of Distance Education,
16(2).
Bandura, A. (1977). Social Learning Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: PrenticeHall.
Black, J. (1997). Retrieved March 30, 2003 from the World Wide Web: http://
www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,7147,00.html.
Brown, B. W. and Liedholm, C. E. (2002, May). Can Web course replace the
classroom in principles of microeconomics? American Economics Review.
Carr, S. (2000, February). As distance education comes of age the challenge is
keeping students, Chronicle of Higher Education.
Chen, H., Lehman, J. and Armstrong, P. (1991). Comparison of performance
and attitude in traditional and computer conferencing classes. The American Journal of Distance Education, 5(3), 51-64.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
188 Martz and Shepherd
Colorito, R. (2001, September/October). Learning online. Indiana Alumni
Magazine, 64(1).
Crump, R. E. (1928). Correspondence and Class Extension Work in Oklahoma. Doctoral Dissertation. Teachers College, Columbia University.
Gagne, M. and Shepherd, M. (2001, April). Distance learning in accounting: A
comparison between distance and traditional accounting class. T.H.E.
Journal, 28(9).
Gunawardena, C. H. and Zittle, F. J. (1997). Social presence as a predictor of
satisfaction within a computer-mediated conferencing environment. American Journal of Distance Education, 11(3).
Hara, N. and Kling, R. (2001). Students’ distress with a Web-based distance
education course. Information, Communication and Society, 3(4).
Haythornthwaite, C., Kazmer, M. M., Robins, J. and Showmaker, S. (2000,
September). Community development among distance learners. Journal
of Computer-Mediated Communication, 6(1).
Hills, H. and Peter, F. (1999). Interaction learning. People Management, 5(14),
48-49.
Hearn, G. and Scott, D. (1998, September). Students staying home. Futures,
30(7), 731-737.
Hogan, D. and Kwiatkowksi, R. (1998, November). Emotional aspects of large
group teaching. Human Relations, 51(11), 1403-1417.
Institute for Higher Education Policy. (2000). Quality on the line: Benchmarks
for Success in Internet Distance Education. Washington, D.C.
Kirkman, B.L., Rosen, B., Gibson, C. B., Etsluk, P. E. and McPherson, S. (2002,
August). Five challenges to virtual team success: Lessons from Sabre, Inc.
The Academy of Management Executive, 16(3).
Kling, R. (2000). Learning about information technologies and social change:
The contribution of social informatics. Information Society, 16(3), 217232.
Maki, R. H., Maki, W. S., Patterson, M. and Whittaker, P. D. (2000). Evaluation
of a Web-based introductory psychology course: Learning and satisfaction
in on-line versus lecture courses. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments and Computers, 32, 230-239.
Moore, M. G. (1995). American distance education: A short literature review.
In F. Lockwood (Ed.), Open and Distance Learning Today. New York:
Routledge.
Neslar, M. S. and Hanner, M. B. (2001). Professional socialization of baccalaureate nursing students. Journal of Nursing.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Assessing the Impact of Internet Testing: Lower Perceived Performance
189
Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms. New York: Basic Books.
Russell, T. (2003). Retrieved March 30, 2003 from the World Wide Web: http:/
/teleeducation.nb.ca/nosignificantdifference/.
Shipley, T. E. and Veroff, J. (1952). A projective measure of need affiliation.
Journal of Experimental Psychology, 43, 349-356.
Seigel, S. (1958). Non-Parametric Statistics. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Svetcov, D. (2000). The virtual classroom vs. the real one. Forbes, 50-52.
Teleeducation (2003). Retrieved March 30, 2003 from the World Wide Web:
http://teleeducation.nb.ca/nosignificantdifference/.
Tu, C. H. (2000). Online learning migration: From social learning theory to social
presence theory in the CMC environment. Journal of Network and
Computer Applications, 23, 27-37.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
190
Kamin and Hagenhoff
Chapter X
Modular Web-Based
Teaching and Learning
Environments as a Way
to Improve E-Learning
Oliver Kamin
University of Göttingen, Germany
Svenja Hagenhoff
University of Göttingen, Germany
Abstract
This chapter can be assigned to the main fields of new and innovative
educational paradigms and learning models, innovative modes of teaching
and learning based on technological capabilities and strengths and
weaknesses of technologies as effective teaching tools. It covers the
construction of e-learning materials using a modular design approach in
order to meet the technical and didactical requirements for the optimum
operation of distance learning scenarios. First, it addresses the development
path and substantial deficits of conventional e-learning materials. After
this, it gives an overview of the requirements the supplier thinks necessary
to develop high quality and state-of-the-art e-learning materials. In the
following section, the customer’s needs with regard to the e-learning
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Modular Web-Based Teaching and Learning Environments
191
materials will be addressed. Accommodating both parties and securing
high quality requires a high flexibility for configuration of a Web-based
learning and teaching environment. The next section introduces the
respective concept based on modular structures. The content-related
design of study modules will be shown with the support of an example taken
from the education network WINFOLine.
Introduction
In e-learning, teaching materials can be accessed by a large and anonymous
group of consumers via modern information technologies without temporal and
local restrictions (Girmes, 1999). Successful implementation requires planning of
the instruction units’ technical and didactical guidelines to fit the learner’s
anthropogeneous and sociocultural conditions. A balanced combination of the
selected contents, intentions, media and methods (Jank and Meyer, 2002) will
achieve this. Many existing distance learning scenarios use e-learning pedagogies
used for conventional presence teaching. Not only do these pedagogies not utilize
the special advantages of the Internet as a distribution channel, they suffer two
major deficits. First, conventional teaching materials are only suitable for small
target groups and cover only a few learning types. Second, more conventional
Computer-Based Trainings (CBT) and Web-Based Trainings (WBT) follow the
construction Paradigms of Courseware Engineering. The core ideas of behaviorist teaching methods are hardly suitable for the self-controlled learning
processes, because of their linear structure (Dichanz, 1994). These are the main
reasons why the effectiveness and success of some traditional e-learning
materials has been low (Gruber, Mandl and Renkel-Schwarzer, 2001).
Depiction and Evaluation of
Conventional E-Learning-Materials
Programmed Learning
Computer-based learning environments began in the early 1960s with “programmed learning.” These environments focused on instilling factual knowledge
with the help of programmed questions (such as fill-in-the-blank exercises and
multiple-choice questions), testing, and other simple training exercises. They
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
192
Kamin and Hagenhoff
were based on a didactic design that relies on behaviorist principles. Through
intermittent reinforcement and through the breaking up of content into very small
units, the computer is to assume the role of the objective conveyor of knowledge
(Schulmeister, 1997). The goal is to eliminate the teacher’s mood changes and,
thus, to be able to offer content of the same form and quality at all times. A major
advantage of multiple and repeated access is assisting the individual process
enabling students to more successfully memorize content than in the conventional classroom.
Empirical studies show that environments based on programmed learning have
been introduced at schools. However, teachers have never really accepted
them, because these teaching methods could not be integrated into conventional
methods (Schulmeister, 1997). Due to the fact that, usually, only an individual
adjustment of learning units and speed is possible, computer-based exercise
programs have significant deficits in the areas of self-regulation, adaptation and
individualization with regard to students (Tergan, 1992). The examination
knowledge students have explicitly memorized through programmed teaching is
also called torpid knowledge (Tramm, 1992). Even though this knowledge can be
reproduced in the same context, students are neither able to transform it to
similar scenarios, nor to apply it to an actual situation that calls for action.
Computer-Based Training
In the 80s and 90s, more complex and powerful hardware and software has
transformed the computer-based learning into a CBT, which has, in addition to
linear, also branched structure. In principle, the rigid structures of the programmed teaching software have been only partially eliminated or not eliminated
at all in these systems (Schulmeister, 1997).
The main areas of usage for CBT are, once again, training and exercise
situations. The teacher is replaced by the computer to spare him from routine
tasks and to offer students the opportunity to access the learning materials at all
times, as often as they want to. The teacher’s responsibility has been changed
from a mere conveyor of knowledge to a coach and motivator. The goal of
conveying knowledge through CBT is to objectify the presentation of content and
to make possible its multiple usages, even by other groups of students. Because
of the lack of a conveyor of knowledge who is able to interact with the students,
the computer is not able to understand the student’s reactions and non-defined
actions (Yass, 2000). Unlike programmed learning, CBT functions as multimedia
tutorials and drill-and-practice learning systems, the latter having found wider
realization (Sembill and Wolf, 1999). In addition to basic behaviorist principles,
CBT includes elements of learning and cognitive psychology.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Modular Web-Based Teaching and Learning Environments
193
When the initial excitement wore off, CBT was not able to fully satisfy users
because of its limitation to the conveyance of factual knowledge for reproduction
only (Hundsinger, 2002). Additionally, the producer concentrated on a high
programming quality, rather than on the realization of an ideal learning environment for self-directed and self-organized learning. One should keep in mind that
CBT, constructed in the fashion we have described above, offers the student only
a limited number of adaptation possibilities and, consequently, not much room for
individualized learning options (Schulmeister, 1997). The program fails to
recognize and evaluate the student’s own ideas and numerous exercises can be
solved by the trial-and-error system (Yass, 2000).
Web-Based Training
Conventional WBT environments mostly originate from CBT. In contrast to their
predecessors, which were partially produced with the help of special software
or were individually programmed, WBT is designed with the instruments and
tools usually used for web sites and are thus accessible via network. The
producer of WBT has new means of design through the net-like structure of
teaching content which results from the usage of hypertext and hypermedia. In
addition to that, the option of opening up new means of communication within the
Internet and an intranet has liberated students from social isolation. At this point,
however, many options are not fully used. Thanks to the fact that WBT was
mostly based on CBT, most WBT makes use of the drill-and-practice system for
the conveyance of knowledge. Consequently, WBT is only suitable for realizing
less complex study objectives As opposed to CBT, conventional WBT has an
added value for students. If the option is implemented in the respective WBT, the
student is able to access additional or differently presented content at all times
using the net-like structure. Practically speaking, though, conventional educational offerings tend to have a linear character despite these additional functions
(Achtenhagen and Lempert, 2000) and do not use the potential of hypertext and
hypermedia to a full extent. Therefore, this type of educational product is only
of limited value for open learning, for multiple usage with various target groups
and for teaching purposes (Dichanz, 1994).
In addition to that, conventional WBT does not satisfy the requirements that
cognitivistic and constructivistic learning theories have on their respective
environments. As a result, the WBT described above conveys mostly torpid
knowledge due to its inherent behaviorist concepts. Therefore, knowledge is
poorly transferable to real-life situations (Gruber, Mandl and Renkl-Schwarzer,
2001).
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
194
Kamin and Hagenhoff
Design Requirements for E-LearningMaterials
Preliminary Thoughts
When comparing the stage of development of already realized learning software
with the requirements of the current teaching and learning research, one can see
that the software does not meet the quality criteria and demands of e-learning.
With the old software, the student cannot develop complex knowledge structures. Therefore, we should start to think about how the respective learning
environments should be designed from the teacher’s perspective (from now on
also referred to as the supplier), in order to satisfy the aforementioned didactic
needs and to facilitate the practical realization and operation of these arrangements. Both the supplier and the student (from now on also referred to as the
consumer) are to be granted a high degree of freedom in order to realize their
individual preferences.
E-learning products which are targeted at the asynchronous way (a time gap
between creating and using information) of conveying information often show
characteristics similar to conventional software. The CBT or the WBT mentioned in the introduction falls into this category, for instance. In particular,
considerations for the roles of the products’ suppliers and customers can be
transferred to the e-learning software. Here the group of suppliers includes
everybody who is concerned with content and technical development, the
technical distribution, and the sale of the product. In addition to the actual
consumer (e.g., the learner), the group of customers includes institutions that buy
the pre-configured materials and make them available to their consumers (e.g.,
the students).
Suppliers’ and Teachers’ Requirements
The development of high quality learning materials is time consuming and
requires large personnel expenditures (Hagenhoff, 2002). The materials should
thus be used as frequently as possible. And instead of repeatedly employing them
in one particular teaching session only, it is also conceivable that a product can
be used in different sessions which are aimed at varying target groups and are
thus connected to different teaching purposes. This includes, for instance, the
usage in vocational schools, in in-house training or in-college education. One
should keep in mind that the materials cannot only be used to support the
acquisition of knowledge, but also can be used for research and evaluation of
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Modular Web-Based Teaching and Learning Environments
195
information in the area of knowledge management. This requires the e-learning
materials to be adaptable to the preference structures of multiple supplier and
customer groups with minimum effort. Instead of creating completely new
learning environments for different target groups, the existing ones should be
used again without creating additional costs. Therefore, the supplier aims at
producing learning materials that can be realized easily, operated smoothly and
maintained without problems. The possibility to import and export existing digital
learning materials easily is of particular importance. We can achieve these
objectives by producing modular e-learning materials. Standard tools and established methods of software development not only offer a maximum of functions,
but the multimedia products produced with these tools can also be hosted on the
same servers as conventional web pages. If an education supplier already owns
a web server, the operation of the learning offerings causes little extra cost.
Customers’ and Learners’ Requirements
The asynchronous way of presenting and conveying information makes Elearning materials accessible at all times. With the help of the Internet and local
intranets, the learner can access web-based learning environments easily.
However, e-learning also has its drawbacks. The learner is prone to feel isolated
because neither teachers, nor fellow students are around. Learning environments with a linear structure usually support only one learning type and the
student is thus not able to leave the predefined studying path (Achtenhagen and
Lempert, 2000). This is particularly problematic if teaching products are
inappropriate for the target group. To keep the learner from being overstrained,
we should structure the materials into easily comprehensible, self-contained
segments and create a motivating atmosphere. We will clearly separate learning
content and technological functions in order to improve the overview and to
facilitate the configuration of the learning environment.
Construction Paradigms for Web-Based
Teaching and Learning Environments
Hypertext and hypermedia are particularly useful to demonstrate the network
structures of complex systems. Modern transmission protocols and standards
ensure that the requirements for the construction of multimedia systems can be
met. These technologies, as well as the modular conception of learning environments, help to meet the supplier’s and customer’s needs. We will call the
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
196
Kamin and Hagenhoff
modularly developed, e-learning materials Web-Based Teaching and Learning
Environments (WTLE) in this chapter. The conceptual proximity to Complex
Teaching and Learning Environments (CTLE) is intended because the research
on CTLE is also applicable in the field of modern teaching and learning
environments (Achtenhagen and John, 1992). In WTLE, the construction
guidelines for cognitivistic and constructivistic learning theories are operationalized.
We have to distinguish e-learning environments constructed according to these
paradigms from conventional e-learning products (WBT and CBT), since the
latter are based on construction principles like courseware engineering or
programmed learning (Yass, 2000).
Modules and Interfaces
The WTLE elements can meet the needs of both teachers and learners by taking
facets of learning theory into account. These modules, which are self-contained
subsystems in terms of content or function (Göpfert, 1998), can be combined by
using interfaces. On the one hand, these interfaces allow for system-specific
connections, such as the use of common object libraries. These connections
(dark lines in Figure 1) are made available through the framework module. On
the other hand, we also need interfaces which provide content-specific connection structures (see the dark lines in Figure 2). With the help of these structures,
Figure 1. Module Concept with System Specific Connection Structure
…
…
C o urs e
m od u le …
S im u la tio n
m o d u le
L istin g
…
C o urs e
m od u le 2
L e ctu re
m o d u le
Ind e x
Se a rc h e ng in e
C o urs e
m od u le 1
Te x t b o o k
m o d u le
G los s a ry
In v e stig a tio n
T e s t/e x erc is e
m o d ule
Fra m e w o rk
m o du le
C om m u n ica tio n m o du le
S erv ice
m o d u le
C om fo rt
m od u le
H elp d es k
m od u le
P rint o u t
m o du le
…
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Modular Web-Based Teaching and Learning Environments
197
modules can be added and removed depending on suppliers’ or customers’
preferences. Generally speaking, adding and removing modules does not significantly influence the basic functions of other modules. The basic modules
(coloured dark in the middle of figure 1) are an exception to this rule. Because
they are required for the rudimentary operation of the WTLE, they cannot be
removed.
System-Specific Modules
The system-specific modules (boxes with rounded edges in Figures 1 and 2)
contain all functions related to the technical aspects of the learning environment.
The learning system requires a comprehensive framework. As we can see in
Figure 1, the framework module contains the global navigation for all parts of the
WTLE. The centralized navigation structure allows all modules to access all
parts of the system. This is the most important basic function of the learning
environment. Content management systems can be used for this task. Besides,
the framework module may enable the user to leave the predefined learning path
and move freely within the WTLE. The communication module, which is also
accessible via the framework module, offers different means of communication
in order to accomplish synchronous and asynchronous tutoring scenarios between learner and tele-tutor. The service and comfort modules offer a wide
variety of additional functions which are not required for the basic operation of
the environment, e.g., systems check, individual configurations and storage of
user data. The modular structure ensures that we can still use the WTLE after
components are omitted or added. If additional modules, like communications or
service, are not available, unrestricted access to the content of course modules
is still possible. The remaining technical modules are configured on the now
limited palette of functions of the arrangement.
Content-Specific Modules
Content-specific modules (boxes with pointed edges in Figures 1 and 2) contain
the didactic elements of the WTLE. Special course modules allow the cognitivistic
arrangement of learning content. In this context, each module has to represent
a self-contained learning unit including statements about the unit’s topic, the
learning objectives, the required prior knowledge and the level of difficulty. With
respect to the content, these modules can be linked arbitrarily. The possible
connections are represented by the lines in Figure 2. Content-related structures
will be realized by using the aforementioned learning objectives and definitions
of prior knowledge, which serve as a content-specific interface.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
198
Kamin and Hagenhoff
A meaningful description of these parameters makes it easier for the future user
of the teaching/learning environment to select modules and put them in order.
Adding advanced study materials to the course modules (glossaries, examples
for particular cases, etc.) is also possible with the help of the content-specific
interface. With the help of meta-tags or similar descriptive elements within the
objects themselves, we can gather information concerning the content-specific
structuring and classification of the modules. Users can access these courses as
a unit or on a by-module basis. Units are represented by transparent boxes with
thick lines around the relevant module structures in Figures 1 and 2. As
mentioned before, we can assign further modules or units to the existing
individual modules or units as needed. Enrichments, which are particularly
suitable in constructivistic learning environments, may be integrated by connecting modules like simulation, search or presentation, which support the acquisition
and application of knowledge.
We can link the modules by defining learning objectives and prior knowledge. In
addition to the module presenting the actual teaching subject, further contentspecific modules are available. They contain a compressed overview of the
subject represented by summaries, lists or glossaries. The learner is able to
generate dynamic outputs and overviews using search and inquiry modules. In
this case, information about the subjects treated in the modules serves as the
necessary content-specific interface. We should be aware, though, that these
Figure 2. Module Concept with Content Specific Connection Structure
…
…
C o urs e
m od u le …
S im u la tio n
m o d u le
L istin g
…
C o urs e
m od u le 2
L e ctu re
m o d u le
Ind e x
Se a rc h e ng in e
C o urs e
m od u le 1
Te x t b o o k
m o d u le
G los s a ry
In v e stig a tio n
T e s t/e x erc is e
m o d ule
Fra m e w o rk
m o du le
C om m u n ica tio n m o du le
S erv ice
m o d u le
C om fo rt
m od u le
H elp d es k
m od u le
P rint o u t
m o du le
…
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Modular Web-Based Teaching and Learning Environments
199
functions require a user who is familiar with the WTLE’s controls. The helpdesk
module gives the user detailed instructions for the operation of all parts of the
WTLE and answers frequently asked questions.
Implementation Approach
As mentioned above, the framework module provides the infrastructure for
operation and use of the WTLE. Depending on the technology chosen for the
transformation of the module concepts, the frame module may be a particular
application which, with the help of established web-technologies, carries out the
configuration of WTLE and provides the means for the user-specific presentation of content and functions. I will use the server-supported WTLE as an
example for an implementing approach.
XML-documents describe all content- and system-specific modules of the
server-supported WTLE — with the exception of the frame module and object
libraries — in Figure 3. The linking of all XML-documents to one network or,
Figure 3. Generating Process of a Server-Supported WTLE
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
200
Kamin and Hagenhoff
Figure 4. Modules, Components and Objects
rather, to one structural concept, is a mirror image of the WTLE architecture as
a whole. Each of the XML-documents contains all content- and system-specific
information of a module and can thus refer to the relevant module components
(see Figure 4) or navigate the entire WTLE (see Figure 1 and 2). After selecting
the necessary components, the framework module, with the construction rules
described in the XML-documents, automatically provides them. With regard to
the server-based solution described in this section, one component is represented
by one Web-page in a content-specific module. On this Web-page, a certain
module displays various content and functions. The specific study material is, for
example, represented by content-specific objects such as real-audio data, flash
animations, graphics and text documents (see Figure 3). These objects, as well
as the functions and procedures described in the system-specific modules, are
stored in the respective libraries. Taken together, all of these components form
the module (see Figure 4). By adding or leaving out components (here, Webpages), an individual adjustment of the module can be achieved without seriously
inhibiting the function of the other modules.
Phase-Oriented Approach
Conventional software engineering approaches can be used for the design of
WTLE. We combine phase-oriented concepts with conventional curriculum
planning methods to accommodate the special needs and characteristics of
teaching and learning environments (Yass, 2000). According to Schumann, the
development process can be divided into six phases (Schumann, 2003; Schach,
1990) or, as Yass suggests, into four steps: analysis, planning/specification,
production and operation (Yass, 2000). The following paragraphs and Figure 5
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Modular Web-Based Teaching and Learning Environments
201
demonstrate Schumann’s six-phase concept and apply it to the specific needs of
learning software development. Parallel to the software development process,
a phase-comprehensive and continuing documentation process takes place.
Authors, developers and operators of the educational product thus get sufficient
information necessary to comprehend the individual steps at all times (Schumann,
2003).
In the initial proposal phase, we describe the relevant goals and content of the
project in an abstract way. On this basis, the particular requirements are clarified
in the specification phase. This phase then produces a specification document
which is used as a basis for the design phase (Vision7, 2002) and contains the
didactic concept of the WTLE. On the basis of this software specification
document, the design guidelines describe the main functions and data of the
educational product. In the design phase, we also produce scripts which outline
the individual elements of the learning modules and bring content in the right
order. In the final design specification phase, the design guidelines are specified
with regard to relevant hardware and software problems (Schumann, 2003;
Vision7, 2002). After completing the design guidelines and the final design
Figure 5.
Phase-Oriented Concepts
Initial pro po sal p hase
An alysis
Project idea
Specification Phase
Requ irem ents and specification
Design ph ase
P lan ning/
sp ecification
Guidelin es/final d esign spec.
Im plem en tion p hase
W TLE
P rodu ction
Test an d deploym en t p hase
T ested W TLE
S up port ph ase
Operation
M odified WTL E
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
202
Kamin and Hagenhoff
specification, the production of WTLE takes place in the implementation or
development phase (Schumann, 2003; Vision7, 2002). With regard to the
modular products described here, the individual objects are produced first. In the
following automatic configuration of the learning modules, it is of utmost
importance that we bring module structure and content (here, objects and
components) into a machine-readable format. While producing the learning
module on a static HTML-basis, we initially generate web sites which contain
references to the respective objects. Afterwards, we link these HTML-pages
(components) according to the didactic concept (if necessary, with some
additional functions). They form the complete education product.
During the test phase, the finished product has to pass comprehensive test runs
and test scenarios to check if the requirements set in the software specification
document and in the didactic concept are met. Stability and functionality of the
education product are also tested. After eliminating all flaws, we make the
WTLE available to the consumer or user (the student). The maintenance phase,
which solves technical and content-related problems identified in practical
usage, then completes the phase-oriented approach (Schumann, 2003; Vision7,
2002).
A Practical Example: Education
Network WINFOLine
Configuration of the Online-Program Master of Science
in Information Systems
We started the Education Network WINFOLine in 1997 to improve the course
offerings at the participating universities in Göttingen, Kassel, Leipzig and
Saarbrücken (Germany) with further e-learning classes. The number of classes
in the department of Information Systems at the participating universities has
been increased by up to 20%. Since 2002, WINFOLine features an internationally recognized master’s degree. In this course of study, we use the e-learning
materials of the four core universities, which have been tested and continually
updated since 1998. In addition to that, we add e-learning materials from other
partner universities. We have designed this as a correspondence course to meet
the specific needs of (working) people who already have a college degree and
want to receive the internationally recognized “Master of Science in Information
Systems” as part of a work-and-study program. Students can access almost all
courses via the Internet or other electronic means at all times and places.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Modular Web-Based Teaching and Learning Environments
203
Personal attendance at one of the four core universities is only required for a
project seminar and for exams.
Figure 6 shows that the course of study is modularly designed. Each course
usually consists of a WTLE and support services. We have divided the course
of study into three majors: Information Systems, Computer Science and Business
Management. The curriculum takes the prior knowledge of all students into
account. For example, if a student has (some) basic knowledge of business
management, he is not required to take (all) introductory courses in the business
management basic study module. Instead, he can substitute them with advanced
courses in Information Systems. Yet, we still want to make sure that the student
can pass the study modules based on this (now skipped) basic module without
problems. If the student has, for instance, put his main emphasis on Information
Systems in his past studies (for example, in his initial studies, he took a class on
databases), he may not, in his Master Studies, take an equivalent course in this
subject. Instead, he has to look for an alternative course, such as Management
Support Systems or Development of Application Systems (DAS).
When configuring further training measures, we need to take the prior knowledge of each individual student into account. This can be achieved with the help
Figure 6. Curriculum WINFOLine Master Course of Studies
Basis studies
Introduction to business management
Introductory
course
Introductory
accountancy
course
business Introductory
management
course
economics
Main emphasis studies
science of business management
Main emphasis studies
computer science
Main emphasis studies
information systems
Study module information systems 1
Introduction
to
computer
science
Course
management
support
systems
Course DAS
Course
databases
Study module information systems 2
Introduction
to
information
systems
Study module information systems 3
Master thesis
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
204
Kamin and Hagenhoff
of the same description fields. We have analyzed this in the section before with
regard to content and didactics. These description fields include information
about content, learning objectives, prior knowledge, level of difficulty, and
content and didactic-related structures of the objects in question.
We should also provide each course of studies with certain liberties for students
to satisfy their individual needs. For the customer, the attractiveness and
acceptance is thus raised and the product can succeed on the market. If we were
to choose a highly restricted design, or rather, if our e-learning materials do not
allow individual accommodations and combinations, this success would be in
danger because redundant courses would be offered simultaneously and independent of each other.
We can plan and design the course offerings of the WINFOLine-Master-Degree
by taking advantage of the same description fields already used in the WTLEinternal configuration. If we look at the whole course of studies or a package of
several WTLE, we call this the macro-perspective. Micro-perspective, on the
other hand, refers to the individual classes, which consist of a single WTLE,
including the coaching. Table 1 shows the analogies between the systematic
design of the WINFOLine Master course of studies (cf., Figure 6) and one
individual WTLE. We can devise a fully automatic and individually shaped study
plan if both levels are documented by identical description fields. An individually
shaped presentation of the study materials follows. We can only achieve this
because the configuration of the individual e-learning materials is based on each
student’s profile.
The Education Network WINFOLine will establish a further course of studies
in the year 2003. The new course of studies has a different main emphasis and
target group than the aforementioned Master’s Degree. We want this new
course of studies to attract students who don’t have a German university degree
as a pre-qualification. For this new and quantitatively more comprehensive
course of studies, we will use the same pool of e-learning materials as a basis.
We can easily configure the existing course modules and tailor them to the
Table 1. Analogies Between the Systemantic Design of the Winfoline master
course of studies and a modular WTLE
Level of
abstraction
Very high
High
Middle
Low
Very low
Macroperspective
Course of studies
Basis/main
emphasis studies
Study module
Course
-
Microperspective
Single WTLE
Module
Component
Object
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Modular Web-Based Teaching and Learning Environments
205
Figure 7. Definition of a Content-Related WTLE-Module
special needs of the new target group using these particular description techniques. Furthermore, we will enrich the pool with other modularly designed elearning materials which provide the basis for more WINFOLine courses.
Configuration of a WTLE for a Basic Course of the Online-Degree Master of
Science in Information Systems
This practical example will demonstrate the design of the study module “Sales
Tax” which is part of the WTLE “Introduction to Accountancy.” Since the Fall
2002, WINFOLine have used this WTLE as an introductory course to the
WINFOLine-Online-Degree “Master of Science in Information Systems.” We
have now entered the design phase of the WTLE. In order to develop the design
guidelines of the WTLE or, rather, the individual study module, we first use the
curriculum of the master’s degree as a content-related foundation on a macroperspective (see upper left side in Figures 6 and 7).
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
206
Kamin and Hagenhoff
The program’s design determines that the study module “Introduction to
Business Management” consists of three different introductory courses students
can choose from. The “Accountancy” course (framed on the second level in
Figure 7) contains two components. The “Accountancy”-WTLE is one component, the other one holds a number of service options not further discussed here.
On the micro-level, the WTLE-study module “Sales Tax” (framed on the third
level in Figure 7) is formed. The dark boxes within the WTLE module on the
fourth level in Figure 7 represent the individual components (Web-pages) with
the study content. We have decided that, aside from integrating complex and
problem-oriented exercises, we should take advantage of cognitivistic learning
theory and add expressive graphics, animations and supplementary explanations
at the end of each module. At some point, practical examples should support the
content and students should be able to access them whenever necessary. By
adding and removing components, the student can change the study module’s
level of difficulty. In this case, out of five possible levels of difficulty, a medium
level is anticipated (see Table 2).
The study content of the “Sales Tax” module are characterized by various
learning objectives (meaning, precise cognitive objectives). Because the WTLE
functions as a content-related interface, we can make the respective connecTable 2. Excerpt of a Script
Module
5: „Sales
Sales Tax
Module 5:
tax“
Comp.
no.
1
Presentation sheet
…
3
…
Indirect taxes
•The sales tax is a consumption tax.
•It can be passed in a value-added-chain as
follow:
-From a company to another company,
-to resellers
-up to end-consumers.
•At least the final consumers and not the resellers
have to pay the sales tax.
…
Explanation text
Notes for the developing team
…
…
•Learning objectives:
-The student should be able to represent important
definitions in the area of sales taxes. (1)
-[…]
-The student should be able to execute all
accounting activities which are concerned to the
treatment of sales tax. (3)
•Keywords: taxes, charges, sales, reseller, […]
•Prior knowledge: accounting (3), expenses and
revenues (4)
•Level of difficulty: middle (3)
…
The best known indirect tax is the
sales tax. The operation of indirect
taxes can be explained with the
help of sales tax (tax debitors and
tax carriers are not the same).
The sales tax is a consumption
tax, this means that the company
will calculate the customer’s
taxable deliveries and will transfer
the earned sales tax to the tax
office.
An added value arises on every
layer of the chain. Every company
have to pay only sales tax of the
gained added value. At the sale of
the supplier bills the respective
buyer for the paid sales tax.[…]
…
•Visualize the system of indirect
taxes with the help of a valueadded-chain with Macromedia
Flash.
•Value-added-chain’s elements
has to display staggered.
•Formulate suitable examples.
…
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Modular Web-Based Teaching and Learning Environments
207
tions. In this module, the student learns to understand the sales tax system and
how to carry out the respective bookings. In order to realize this objective, we
chose a cognitive learning objective on Level 3 (application), according to
Bloom’s taxonomy of learning objectives (Bloom, 1972). On the basis of the
respective objectives and the content-related characteristics, we have defined
the following precise objective:
The student should be able to execute all accounting activities which are
concerned with the treatment of sales tax.
As we can see, a content (here, accounting activities and sales tax) and a
behavior-related component (here, execute) form the learning objective. The
learning objectives, prior knowledge and difficulty levels, keywords, as well as
the specific content are summarized in scripts. In this context, we add meaningful
numeric scales to the description fields in order to guarantee that they are
machine-readable and can, thus, be easily evaluated.
Table 2 presents part of the script of the aforementioned study module. This
segment contains two components. The script in this table is the result of the
content-related concept. We use it as the main basis for further development of
the WTLE and continually append it for documentation purposes. When developing the final design specifications, scripts are being analyzed with regard to a
multitude of relevant technical software and hardware criteria. This specific
example demonstrates that the animated graphic in component 3 is to be realized
with the help of Macromedia Flash (see Table 2). In order to do so, we set the
specific sizes, colors and times. The same is true for the explanations, where we
arrange fonts and type size. These decisions are also important for the screen
resolution for which this product is to be optimized. Now, we need a meaningful
name for the objects and components in order to clearly identify them later. If
we do not automatically generate components and modules with a special
content management system, we need to clarify further questions for the
application and for the necessary connections.
One has to decide and clarify, for instance, whether we want to realize the
product with the help of static HTML pages or through a dynamic issuing of
content with the help of a database. Even at this early point, we can see that we
should take a multitude of design criteria into account in the final design
specification document. For reasons of space, though, we will not discuss all of
them in detail.
The following screenshots give the reader an impression of the WTLE described
above. Figure 8 shows the realization of component 3, which is itself part of the
“Sales Tax” module and has been described in Table 2. On the top and bottom
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
208
Kamin and Hagenhoff
Figure 8. Screenshot of Component 3 of the “Sales Tax” Module
of the screen, we can see the navigation options, which are made accessible
through the framework module (see section, “Design Requirements”). According to the script (see Table 2), the flash-animation in the middle of the screen
shows the value chain. On the left and right-hand side, we see text blocks which
have also been specified in the script. In accordance with the script, the student
finds further explanations and practical examples in the dark-colored box.
Figure 9 shows the WTLE-internal search engine, which also works offline, and
belongs to the content-related modules. The search frame takes all modules into
consideration. The white area on top represents the entry box with the results
right underneath.
The comfort-module “Plug-in test,” which is one of the system-related modules,
is presented in Figure 10. This module checks whether the user’s computer
system has installed all the plug-ins or, rather, the programs necessary to use the
WTLE. In case they are nonexistent, the user is asked to install them at this point.
In this example, the student’s computer system has passed the first three tests,
which is symbolized by the green lights.
The last figure shows another content-related module. This time, it is a
screenshot of a case study as a complex module, which is to convey additional
knowledge to the learner in a constructivistic way. In accordance with Figure 2
in the section before, an additional module helps to establish a content-related
connection to the actual course. Based on the learner’s preferences and
technical prerequisites, the Realplayer’s video presentation can be transferred
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Modular Web-Based Teaching and Learning Environments
209
Figure 9. Screenshot of the Content-Related Module “Search Engine”
Figure 10. Screenshot of the System-Related Module “Plug-in-Test”
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
210
Kamin and Hagenhoff
Figure 11.
Study)
Screenshot of an Additional Lecture Module (Complex Case
into a audio or text presentation at all times. Multimedia elements can also be
inserted or cut out. Even a combination of all of the different types of media is
easily possible.
One can see that, when cutting out (with the exception of the frame module) or
inserting additional modules, the operating condition of the “Accountancy”
WTLE is still guaranteed. The user can also adjust it to his specific needs.
Summary
The development of high quality and economically sensible e-learning materials
requires the consideration of various interests. In order to guarantee the multiple
uses of study materials, it is wise to design and realize these products in a modular
fashion. This is necessary to divide the immense developing costs between many
customers in different fields of usage. By using already developed system
components and resources, we can decrease the developing costs. Similar
production methods have succeeded in the industrial production decades ago.
Through a combination of e-learning software development, the insights from
software engineering, and the product policy in industrial production, we have
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Modular Web-Based Teaching and Learning Environments
211
created new design opportunities to increase possible uses and, consequently,
the potential for the success of e-learning in the education market.
Yet, we have to keep in mind that, when technically realizing modularly
constructed education products, we have to fall back on already established
standards and realization methods. Modular products depend on an open
structure and possibilities for combination with other (possibly elsewhere
developed) components. If we had chosen a highly restricted concept, this would
lower — because of its lack of flexibility — the approval rate and the
opportunities to use this product on the education market. When selecting the
technologies to realize and distribute the materials, we should also keep in mind
the aspect of multiple uses. So far, we were only able to use the implementation
approach in server-based systems. Consequently, we had to exclude potential
users who do not have Internet access. Therefore, we should add an offline
option with similar configuration and distribution possibilities of a WTLE.
References
Achtenhagen, F. and John, E. (eds.). (1992). Mehrdimensionale Lehr-LernArrangements, Innovationen in der Kaufmännischen Aus- und
Weiterbildung. Wiesbaden: Gabler Verlag.
Achtenhagen, F. and Lempert, W. (eds.). (2000). Lebenslanges Lernen im
Beruf - Seine Grundlegung im Kindes und Jugendalter - Das
Forschungs- und Reformprogramm (Vol. 1). Opladen: Leske und Budrich
Verlag.
Bloom, B. (1972). Taxonomie von Lernzielen im kognitiven Bereich, Basel.
Dichanz, H. (1994). Konzepte offenen Lernens - Chancen und Grenzen im
Fernunterricht. In G. Zimmer (Ed.), Vom Fernunterricht zum Open
Distance Learning - Eine europäische Initiative. Bielefeld: Bundesinstitut
für Berufliche Bildung.
Girmes, R. (ed.). (1999). Lehrdesign und Neue Medien: Analyse und
Konstruktion. München: Waxmann Verlag.
Gruber, H., Mandl, H. and Renkel-Schwarzer, A. (2001). Was lernen wir in
Schule und Hochschule: Träges Wissen? Retrieved May 17, 2002 from
the World Wide Web: http://www.ph-weingarten.de/homepage/faecher/
psychologie/konrad/handlungsorientierung/wissenHAN.htm.
Göpfert, J. (1998). Modulare Produktentwicklung — Zur gemeinsamen
Gestaltung von Technik und Organisation. Wiesbaden: Gabler Verlag.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
212
Kamin and Hagenhoff
Hagenhoff, S. (2002). Universitäre Bildungskooperationen —
Gestaltungsvarianten für Geschäftsmodelle. Wiesbaden: Gabler Verlag.
Hundsinger, H. (2002). Einsatz computerunterstützter Lernprogramme (CBT)
in beruflichen Schulen — Erfahrungen aus einem BLK-Modellversuch.
Retrieved May 21, 2002 from the World Wide Web: http://
www.leu.bw.schule.de/beruf/modvers/mv2/cbt-summary.htm.
Jank, W. and Meyer, H. (2002). Didaktische Modelle. Berlin: Cornelsen
Verlag.
Schach, S. (1990). Software Engineering. Boston, MA: Aksen Associates
Incorporated Publishers.
Schulmeister, R. (1997). Grundlagen hypermedialer Lernsysteme, Theorie
— Didaktik — Design. München: Oldenbourg Verlag.
Schumann, M. (2003). Entwicklung von Anwendungssystemen. Retrieved
March 18, 2003 from the World Wide Web: http://www.WINFOLine.unigoettingen.de/wbt/eas.
Sembill, D. and Wolf, K. (1999). Einsatz interaktiver Medien in komplexen LehrLern-Arrangements. Symposium Multimediales Lernen - Resultate und
Perspektiven. In I. Gogolin and D. Lenzen (Eds.), Medien-Generation.
Beiträge zum 16. Kongress der Deutschen Gesellschaft für
Erziehungswissenschaft, Opladen.
Tergan, S. (1992). Wie geeignet sind computerbasierte Lernsysteme für das
Offene Lernen in der beruflichen Weiterbildung? In F. Achtenhagen and E.
John (Eds.), Mehrdimensionale Lehr-Lern-Arrangements, Innovationen
in der Kaufmännischen Aus- und Weiterbildung. Wiesbaden: Gabler
Verlag.
Tramm, T. (1992). Grundzüge des Göttinger Projekts Lernen, Denken, Handeln
in komplexen ökonomischen Situationben- unter Nutzung neuer Technologien
in der kaufmännischen Berufsausbildung. In F. Achtenhagen and E. John
(Eds.), Mehrdimensionale Lehr-Lern-Arrangements, Innovationen in
der Kaufmännischen Aus- und Weiterbildung. Wiesbaden: Gabler Verlag.
Vision7 (2002). Software Development. Retrieved March 24, 2002 from the
World Wide Web: http://www.vision7.com/SoftwareDevelopment.
Yass, M. (2000). Entwicklung multimedialer Anwendungen — Eine
systematische Einführung. Heidelberg: Dpunkt Verlag.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
The Effect of Culture on Email Use 213
Chapter XI
The Effect of Culture
on Email Use:
Implications for
Distance Learning
Jonathan Frank
Suffolk University, Boston, USA
Janet Toland
Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand
Karen Schenk
K. D. Schenk and Associates Consulting, USA
Abstract
This chapter examines how students from different cultural backgrounds
use email to communicate with other students and teachers. The South
Pacific region, isolated, vast, and culturally diverse, was selected as an
appropriate research environment in which to study the effect of cultural
differences and educational technology on distance learning. The context
of this research was two competing distance education institutions in Fiji,
the University of the South Pacific and Central Queensland University.
Three research questions were addressed: Does cultural background
affect the extent to which students use email to communicate with educators
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
214 Frank, Toland and Schenk
and other students for academic and social reasons? Does cultural
background affect the academic content of email messages? Does cultural
background influence students’ preference to ask questions or provide
answers using email instead of face-to-face communication? To address
these issues, two studies were conducted in parallel. Subjects were drawn
from business information systems and computer information technology
classes at the University of the South Pacific (USP) and Central Queensland
University (CQU). Four hundred students at USP were surveyed about
their email usage. In the CQU study, postings to course discussion lists by
867 students were analyzed. The results of these studies suggest that there
are significant differences in the use of email by students from different
cultural backgrounds.
Introduction
The impact of cultural diversity on group interactions through technology is an
active research area. In common with the business world, the world of education
is becoming increasingly globalized, and it is important for instructors to
understand the impact of cultural differences on student learning. Cultural
diversity represents an enormous challenge for global teams, but also offers a
potential richness. Cultures and management styles often clash. People from
different cultures have varying ideas about appropriate methods of communication and levels of accountability (Dubé and Paré, 2001). Acquiring the ability to
manage cultural differences successfully can give a university significant
advantages. The way forward is to foster cross-cultural learning and participation in education (Holden, 2002).
The following scenario highlights some cultural differences that may impact the
distance learning process:
“Tenika, thank you for coming to see me. I’m concerned about your silence
in class. Fifteen percent of your grade is based on class participation, and
yet you never ask questions, express your opinions, or challenge the views
of other students in class.” Tenika Kepa, a Fijian M.B.A. student studying
in Boston looked down, embarrassed. “Dr. Smith, I’m sorry, in my country
to ask a question in class is considered rude. Fijians do not like
confrontation. When our people disagree, they remain silent. This is often
misinterpreted by people who demand or expect that we tell them to their
faces what we do not want. We want them to be sensitive enough to feel that
we don’t agree. This is part of our culture.” (Woodward, 2000)
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
The Effect of Culture on Email Use 215
Student engagement, discourse, and interaction are valued highly in “western”
universities. Educators from individualist cultures like America, Europe and
Australia may recognize Dr. Smith’s frustration with Tenika’s “quietness” in
class. International students from Asian collectivist cultures may also empathize
with Tenika’s embarrassment at having to stand out against her group and
express a personal opinion. With growing internationalization of western campuses, and rising distance learning enrollments, intercultural frictions are bound
to increase.
There have been a number of papers that have examined the impact of cultural
diversity and group interaction in computer-mediated communication environments (Jarvenpaa et al., 1998). This research adds to the body of knowledge by
evaluating email effectiveness as a communications medium in facilitating
meaningful class participation in two distance education institutions: The University of the South Pacific and Central Queensland University.
This chapter addresses three research questions:
1.
Does cultural background affect the extent to which students use email to
communicate with educators and other students for academic and social
reasons?
2.
Does cultural background affect the academic content of email messages?
3.
Does cultural background influence students’ preference to ask questions
or provide answers using email instead of face-to-face communication?
Literature Review
Hofstede’s (1991) well-known model categorizes different cultures according to
five pairs of dimensions (Figure 1).
Though his research has been criticized as being somewhat simplistic and dated,
it provided a useful starting point for exploring possible differences between
people from different cultural backgrounds (Holden, 2002; Myers and Tan,
2002). No formal research has yet been completed that maps Hofstede’s model
on the many South Pacific cultures, though there have been a number of recent
publications reviewing aspects of the development of IT in the South Pacific
(Davis et al., 2002; Olutimayin, 2002; Purcell and Toland, 2003). Lynch et al.
(2002) have explored Hofstede’s framework with respect to Fiji, hypothesizing
where the indigenous Fijian population and the Indo Fijian population would fit on
the framework. However, they are still in the process of collecting empirical
evidence to validate their work. This research forms a useful starting point which
makes it possible to locate South Pacific cultures on the dimensions of individualism, collectivism and power distance.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
216 Frank, Toland and Schenk
Figure 1. Hofstede’s Model of Cultural Differences
Power
Distance
Uncertainty
Avoidance
Long-Term
Orientation
CULTURAL
DIFFERENCES
Masculinity/
Femininity
Individualism/
Collectivism
The literature has often cited difficulties in motivating students from Collectivist
(as opposed to Individualistic) cultures to “speak up” in a face-to-face learning
situation. Hofstede’s evidence suggests that students from a collectivist culture
prefer to listen, reflect, and discuss in person with peers, before preparing a
written response. In many other collectivist cultures, it would be considered
undesirable for students to speak up in class, as communication is mostly
teacher-centered. In Fiji, lecturers have widely commented on the “quietness”
of their students (Handel, 1998). Additionally, in some pacific cultural norms,
student silence is seen as a sign of respect for teachers (Matthewson et al.,
1998).
One problem with current research lies in interpretation. Most research has been
carried out by westerners, who tend to judge students against their own cultural
background (Jones, 1999). For example, some studies found that Chinese
students from a collectivist culture adopt rote learning approaches, which were
interpreted by western individualist teachers as inferior (Samuelowicz, 1987).
More recent studies concluded that there is little evidence to support this belief
and that Chinese students are no more likely to rely on rote learning than their
Western peers (Watkins et al., 1991).
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
The Effect of Culture on Email Use 217
Most research on the effect of cultural differences has focused on traditional
face-to-face teaching, rather than on distance education. More research is
needed to understand fully the cultural contexts in which distance education
programs are situated and how distance students process materials, especially
in a second language (Guy, 1991).
A recent study investigated student media preferences from collectivist versus
individualist cultures and concluded that collectivist students were significantly
less comfortable with computer-mediated interaction, favoring face-to-face
interaction, instead (Anakwe, 1999). The study concluded that students from
collectivist cultures would be less receptive to distance education than students
from individualistic cultures. It has been shown that students from individualistic
cultures are also more willing to respond to ambiguous messages (Gudykunst,
1997), which may result in a different approach to email.
Other authors have suggested that a student’s culture appears to influence online
interactions with teachers and other students (Freedman and Liu, 1996); students
from Asian and Western cultures have different web-based learning styles
(Liang and McQueen, 1999); Scandinavian students demonstrate a more restrained online presence compared to their more expressive American counterparts (Bannon, 1995); and differences in participation levels were found across
cultures in online compared to face-to-face discussions (Warschauer, 1996).
Cultural Differences
The Hofstede dimensions of interest for this research were individualism versus
collectivism and high power distance versus low power distance. Hofstede’s
work indicated a strong relationship between a country’s national wealth and the
degree of individualism in its culture. Richer countries tend to have an individualistic style, whereas poorer countries are more collectivist. As a poor country
grows richer it tends to move away from a collectivist pattern to an individualistic
one. Additionally, people from a rural background tend to be more collectivist
than those from an urban background. Therefore, identifying communication
choice differences between students from urban and rural backgrounds was of
interest to this study also.
A country that is collectivist is also likely to be a high power distance country,
where the views of senior people tend not to be questioned. Pacific Island people
fall into the high power distance with their system of chiefs and their tradition of
not questioning the chief’s decision. Society is also collectivist in nature with the
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
218 Frank, Toland and Schenk
custom of “Kere Kere” or not being able to refuse a favor that is asked of you
by a member of your own in-group.
Indo-Fijian students come from a somewhat different background. Indo-Fijians
have lived in Fiji for at least three generations and because they arrived as
immigrants or through the Girmit (bought in labor) system, they appear not to
have the strong family ties that native Fijians have. Previous work has classified
India as a high power distance, collectivist country; however, India scores much
higher on the individualism index than most other poor countries. The caste
system among the Indians within Fiji is not as prominent as in India; therefore,
power distance tends to be smaller than among the Fijian population. Indo-Fijians
have lower uncertainty avoidance and are more inclined to take risks, which
helps to explain their success in the commercial sector in Fiji. Therefore,
although both groups of students are collectivists, the Pacific Island students
would be expected to be more strongly collectivist than the Indo-Fijian students.
It should be noted that these classifications are very broad, as Lynch et al. (2002)
note there are significant divisions between Indo-Fijian groups, based on caste
and religion and also between indigenous Fijians based on different regional and
historical affiliations. Within these two main and quite distinct cultures, each
individual will construct their own value system depending on their cultural
background and life experiences. However, the Hofstede framework makes a
useful starting point for beginning to understand broad cultural differences.
In conflict situations, members of collectivist cultures are likely to use avoidance,
intermediaries, or other face-saving techniques. In collectivist societies, ingroup/out-group distinctions continue in education settings so that students from
different ethnic or clan backgrounds often form sub-groups in class. They work
together on assignments and there is often little interaction with students from
different sub-groups.
In a distance education context this can make the summer school teaching
experience in an island center very different from main campus teaching, as the
summer school students are all part of the same in-group. Within the region,
variations in cultural attitudes towards technology have been noted by various
visiting lecturers. Two recent surveys of information distribution and communication technology showed marked variations in computer and Internet access
among different countries of the Pacific Island region (Landbeck, 2000; Lockwood,
2000).
The next part of this section will focus on understanding and modeling the
differences between the University of the South Pacific (USP) and Central
Queensland University (CQU).
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
The Effect of Culture on Email Use 219
Knowledge Transfer
The two institutions studied have different approaches to education. The
University of the South Pacific (USP) is owned and operated by 12 Pacific Island
countries. USP serves a population base of more than 1.8 million people. The
member countries are scattered more than 32 million square kilometers of ocean.
Within the South Pacific region there is great cultural, language, and economic
diversity, with more than 200 languages spoken (Landbeck and Mugler, 2000).
USP was established in 1966 as a dual mode institution to offer both campus and
distance learning courses. In 2000 student enrolment reached 9,118 (46%
external). Similar to many universities around the world, USP has experienced
rapid growth, with first year enrollments in mathematics and computing science
courses rising as high as 700 students (Daniel, 1996).
Central Queensland University, based in Rockhampton, Australia, has recently
opened a campus in Suva, Fiji. The campus has about 1,000 students from China,
Korea, India, Bangladesh and Fiji. CQU’s public relations office has extended
more than 2,000 offers to students for the 2001 school year. CQU Fiji has an
electronic library that links to the CQU main library in Rockhampton. Every
student has access to email and the Internet. The university has a policy of
interactive, system-wide learning.
For the purpose of model building, USP can be viewed as a traditional university
where knowledge transfer tends to occur in a one-directional mode. In many
developing world universities, it is traditional for educators to lecture and
students to listen and learn. Publicly questioning the teacher is considered rude.
Knowledge flows from the “professor” or “lecturer” to the student. This
familiar model is often called the container or transfer model of knowledge
transfer, or migratory knowledge (Badaracco, 1991). An example of a “pure”
container model might be the traditional distance learning via a correspondence
course. USP’s distance learning model is somewhat similar in that learning
materials are packaged for students and little interaction is anticipated between
student and teacher. Figure 2 proposes an adaptation of the container model
incorporating a bridging function (Jin et al., 1998), as well as components to
reflect the affect of distance learning technology and cultural factors on
knowledge transfer.
In contrast, Central Queensland University course pedagogy is extraordinarily
dependent on email communication. Fifty percent of students’ grades are based
on group exercises. Groups consist of five to 10 students from 12 countries.
Students are assigned to groups by the course coordinator to maximize diversity.
Students are required to post within group and between group evaluations to a
listserv each week (Romm, 2001; Jones, 1999). Its teaching philosophy empha-
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
220 Frank, Toland and Schenk
Figure 2. Distance Learning Model with One-Way Knowledge Transfer
Knowledge
Professor
Communication
Distance Learning
Technology
Bridging Function
Cultural
Differences
Communication
Students
Knowledge
sizes the importance of student-student and student-teacher interaction using
computer-mediated communication. A large percentage of a distance learning
student’s grade is based on teamwork. Students are encouraged to learn from
each other, as well as from the teacher.
The social construction model of learning and knowledge transfer was deemed
appropriate for CQU. This model represents knowledge as one part of a
process. It considers knowledge, cognition, action, and communication as
inseparable. “The term enactment captures this interrelationship among the
different aspects of knowing, acting, communicating, and perceiving. Knowledge takes on meaning as the entity interacts with its environment through
communicating with other entities, acting (and, thereby, changing the environment), and interpreting cues arising from these interactions” (Weick, 1979).
Figure 3 modifies an extension of Weick’s work (Jin et al., 1998) to incorporate
technological and cultural factors that might affect the success of a distance
education “social constructivist” view. As students in virtual teams perceive that
communication often is imperfect even when the students agree on a course of
action. The problems associated with flawed communication often result in a
knowledge transfer breakdown. Badaracco (1991, p. 82) notes this when he
refers to “embedded knowledge, knowledge that resides in the relationships
between and among individuals and groups.”
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
The Effect of Culture on Email Use 221
Figure 3. Distance Learning Model with Socially Constructed Knowledge
Knowledge
Action
Professor
Cognition
Communication
Distance Learning
Technology
Bridging Function
Cultural
Differences
Communication
Cognition
Students
Action
Knowledge
The University of the South Pacific
(USP) Study
In 2001/2002 a questionnaire survey was conducted at USP to ascertain
students’ use of such facilities as email and Internet and to look at the differences
in provision between rural and urban areas. A sample of almost 400 undergraduate students was surveyed. The majority were Fiji based students studying on the
main campus by face-to-face mode.
Seventy-four percent of the sample were full-time rather than part-time students. The majority (53%) of respondents were aged between 20 and 24 and
approximately two thirds (66%) were male. The students were taking a range of
subjects, but slightly over half the sample were studying for Computer Science
and/or Information Systems majors. The majority of the sample (65%) were
Fijian or Indo-Fijian, however, some data was collected from summer schools
conducted in Kiribati, Vanuatu and the Solomon Islands, which gave a more
representative sample of the USP students. The summer schools were also
taught in a face-to-face mode for intensive six-week blocks. See Figure 4 for
sample breakdown by country.
The questionnaire was anonymous, and due to ethnic tensions in Fiji at the time
of the survey, students were not asked to identify their nationality. Therefore, no
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
222 Frank, Toland and Schenk
Figure 4. Number of Survey Respondents by Country
distinction can be made between Fijian and Indo-Fijian students in terms of
cultural background. From observation, roughly 75% of the students taking
Computer Science and Information Systems in Fiji were Indo-Fijian. There were
no significant numbers of other ethnic groups in the data from the regional
centers.
Results and Discussion
Approximately 90% of the students reported having email access that was used
mainly for social purposes. More than 65% of students used email more than 10
times per semester to contact friends (see Table 1).
Is email used to a more limited extent for purposes of teaching and learning? Less
than 2% of students surveyed would choose email as their first choice method
to ask a lecturer a question about a course. As illustrated in Table 2 below,
emailing a lecturer to ask a question is the fourth most frequent choice. The
majority of students prefer to consult the lecturer face-to-face or to ask a fellow
student. However, it should be noted that students do not feel that they are at a
disadvantage by choosing not to use email. Most (75%) of the students reported
being able to get answers for questions they put to lecturers within a maximum
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
The Effect of Culture on Email Use 223
Table 1. Breakdown of Numbers of Email Messages Sent to Friends by
Students per Semester (for Whole Student Group)
Valid
Frequency
Percent
Never
65
16.4
One to five per semester
40
10.1
Six to 10 per semester
28
7.1
> 10 per semester
254
64.0
Total
387
97.5
10
2.5
397
100.0
Missing
Total
of two days. The results indicate that many USP students have no real need to
use email as their traditional methods of asking friends or asking the lecturer
face-to-face have proven effective.
About half the students surveyed (46%) never use email to contact their
lecturers and the remainder use it infrequently. Ninety percent of students send
five or fewer messages a semester for this purpose.
Table 2. Ranking of Email as a Method of Asking a Lecturer a Question,
Out of a Choice of Five Methods (All Students Included)
Frequency Percent
1
6
1.5
2
37
9.3
3
90
22.7
4
171
43.1
5
89
22.4
393
99.0
4
1.0
397
100.0
Rank
Total
Missing
Total
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
224 Frank, Toland and Schenk
Table 3. Numbers of Emails Sent to Students by Lecturers (All Students
Included)
Frequency
Never
Valid
124
31.2
One to five semester
97
24.4
Five to 10 semester
80
20.2
More than 10
94
23.7
395
99.5
2
.5
397
100.0
Total
Missing
Total
Percent
Approximately one third of students never received email from lecturers and
50% either received no email at all or fewer than five messages per semester.
(See Table 3.) Several students commented that they received email from their
information systems and computer science lecturers, but not from lecturers in
other subjects: information systems and computer science students comprised
the largest percentage of students who received 10 or more messages per
semester from their lecturers.
The majority of the CS and IS courses use web pages stored on the university
intranet to hold information such as lecture notes and assignment details. The
main teaching model used is a one-way flow of information from teacher to
student with a very limited use of two-way communication. Students were also
less likely to use email to contact the administration, with the majority (88.6%)
indicating that they never emailed the administration.
Students did take advantage of the opportunity to access the Internet and the
USP home page. Sixty percent of students reported that they accessed the
Internet and the USP homepage at least once or twice per semester. However,
students were unlikely to use the online journals available through the library.
Only about a quarter of students used this facility.
When the data from other South Pacific regions are compared with Fiji, a clear
contrast emerges. Other regions show much less use of email. (See Figures 5 and
6.) In many cases, regional students had as much opportunity to use email as main
campus students. For example, in Vanuatu there is a student:PC ratio of 10:1,
as compared to 30:1 in Fiji, so lack of access to technology alone does not explain
the differences seen.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
The Effect of Culture on Email Use 225
Figure 5. Emails Sent to Students by Lecturers: Fiji vs. Rest of South Pacific
(All Students Included)
There seems to be a significant difference between emails received from
lecturers by rural versus urban students. A rural student appears to be less likely
to receive an email from their lecturer than an urban student. The results for both
emails sent to lecturers and friends were not significant. Further examination
indicates that neither rural nor urban students are likely to send emails to
lecturers. The use of email for teaching and learning appears to be low (Table
4).
Figure 6. Emails Sent by Students to Lecturers: Fiji vs. Rest of South Pacific
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
226 Frank, Toland and Schenk
Table 4. Emails Sent to Lecturers by Students (All Students Except Kiribati)
Student
Home
Never
One to five per
semester
Five to 10
per
semester
More than
10
Total
Rural
10.6%
12.1%
1.8%
.9%
25.3%
Town
16.5%
17.9%
2.4%
1.8%
38.5%
City
12.4%
19.1%
2.4%
2.4%
36.2%
Total
39.4%
49.1%
6.5%
5.0%
100.0%
The number of emails sent to friends was analyzed. No significant relationship
was found among rural, town and urban students regarding frequency of email
use to contact friends (see Table 5). These results indicate that there is no
difference between students of different collectivist cultural backgrounds in their
frequency of email use for social purposes.
To examine more fully the rural versus urban dimension in regards to email usage
for teaching and learning, it was decided to examine the data set of main campus
students. All main campus students should have similar access to technology.
Therefore, a comparison of students from a rural and an urban background would
not be influenced by such issues as less sophisticated technology or a lack of
access to technology.
When the email use by main campus students from rural and urban backgrounds
was compared using Pearson chi-square, no significant relationships were
found. These results tend to suggest that when students have an equal access to
technology, their use of email will be similar independent of the extent of their
collectivist cultural background.
Table 5. Count of Emails Sent by Students to Friends (All Students Except
Kiribati)
Never
One to five
per semester
Six to 10 per
semester
More than 10 per
semester
Total
Rural
2.4%
2.7%
1.5%
18.6%
25.1%
Town
3.8%
3.8%
3.8%
27.2%
38.8%
City
.9%
3.3%
3.0%
29.0%
36.1%
Total
7.1%
9.8%
8.3%
74.9%
100
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
The Effect of Culture on Email Use 227
The Central Queensland University
Study
Central Queensland University makes use of a list server in all distance classes.
Membership to the lists is open to the public and students are warned that all their
posts to the list are accessible to the public. Two semesters of student posts
were analyzed covering the period: July 16, 2001 to December 14, 2001. As the
University of South Pacific survey had focused on student use of email in
information technology classes, a similar data set was chosen for CQU. The
Faculty of Informatics and Communication at http://www.infocom.cqu.edu.au/
Courses/ delivers business oriented and technology oriented computer classes.
This study focused on 21 courses in these two areas.
Names and email addresses of more than 1,500 individuals who had posted
messages to the discussion lists were recorded. Students had email domain
names from Australia, Brunei, Fiji, Hong Kong, Malaysia, New Guinea, Singapore,
and Taiwan. The first step was to extract students from Australia and Fiji with
an email domain of .fj or .au. Students with email addresses from Hotmail,
Yahoo, etc., were not included. Several students participated in more than one
class, but most names were unique.
The next step was to separate the teachers from the students. It was assumed
that teachers and teaching assistants would be regular contributors to their class
discussion list. After tabulating the number of posts by each remaining participant a small group of very frequent posters was investigated. This involved
checking each class syllabus for teachers and assistants names. A further check
for frequent poster email addresses on Google determined whether these
participants were affiliated professionally with CQU. This led to the removal of
42 individuals from the sample.
The final step was the most difficult and subjective taken to refine the sample.
The study’s purpose was to compare students from collectivist and individualist
cultures. The authors decided, therefore, to remove “western” students from
the Fiji sample and to ensure that the Australian sample included only “western”
students. In Fiji there were only a few students with “western” names who were
removed. In Australia about 15% of students had names that appeared to
several investigators to be Asian in origin. It was impossible to determine
whether these students had just arrived in Australia, or had lived there for
generations. However, to avoid the possibility of confounding study findings
with a mixed individualist/collectivist Australian sample, the individuals identified
were excluded.
The remaining sample consisted of 653 students from Australia studying
information technology classes and 160 studying business information systems
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
228 Frank, Toland and Schenk
classes. From Fiji, there were 47 students studying information technology
classes and seven studying business information systems classes. Given the
small sample size of Fijian students, the sample of business IS classes and
computer IT classes were combined.
Results and Discussion
As expected, Australian students send significantly more posts to their discussion board than Fijian students. This confirms the hypothesis that Australian
students (individualist culture) would be more active in discussion lists than Fijian
students (collectivist culture).
The final stage of this analysis focused on the content of messages posted to the
discussion lists. A random sample of 260 messages was drawn from Australian
and Fijian students. Message content was coded as either a question, an answer,
or social. Analysis indicates that there are significant differences between
Fijian and Australian students’ posting behavior (Table 6).
Australian students appear more ready to respond to questions than Fijian
students. Fijian students volunteered fewer answers to the list. One plausible
explanation might be that Fijian students feel anxious about “losing face” among
their peer group if their answer is inappropriate. Another possibility could be that
Fijian students view participation on the list as not directly affecting their grade
and, therefore, see no reason to volunteer answers. An analysis of Fijian
messages confirmed that a large percentage of messages were social in nature.
Students appear to use the lists for forming groups more often than Australian
students. Further investigation of questions asked by Fijian students indicated a
need for reduction in ambiguity about assignment specifications. Analysis shows
Table 6. Comparison of List Posting Behavior by Message Type
Fiji Students
Australian Students
Question
52
40
Answer
36
77
Social
35
20
CHI-SQUARED
SIG
19.83
0.00005
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
The Effect of Culture on Email Use 229
that Australian students had proportionately fewer questions, which were
primarily technical in nature, or, interestingly, focused on what courses they
should take next semester.
Conclusion
This chapter examined how students from different cultural backgrounds use
email to communicate with other students and teachers. The South Pacific
region, isolated, vast, and culturally diverse, was selected as an appropriate
research environment in which to study the effect of cultural differences and
educational technology on distance learning. The context of this research was
two competing distance education institutions in Fiji, the University of the South
Pacific and Central Queensland University. Email was used for teaching and
learning in different ways at these institutions. At Central Queensland University, email was incorporated into teaching pedagogy across all courses, whereas
at the University of the South Pacific email was available to students, but usage
was voluntary.
Three research questions were addressed: Does cultural background affect the
extent to which students use email to communicate with educators and other
students for academic and social reasons? Does cultural background affect the
academic content of email messages? Does cultural background influence
students’ preference to ask questions or provide answers using email instead of
face-to-face communication? To address these issues, two studies were conducted in parallel. Subjects were drawn from business information systems and
computer information technology classes at the University of the South Pacific
and Central Queensland University. Four hundred students from the University
of the South Pacific were located at different regional centers were surveyed
about their email usage. In the Central Queensland University study, postings to
course discussion lists by 867 students based in Fiji and Australia were analyzed.
The results of these studies suggest that there are significant differences in the
use of email by students from different cultural backgrounds and that cultural
differences do impact student preferences and practices with regard to email
use.
The USP study suggested that collectivist students are more likely to use email
to interact socially with their peers than they are to use it for contacting their
lecturers. The USP study compares the numbers of emails sent by students from
the regions with students from the main centers. There is evidence of less email
usage by students from a rural background, but this result is not conclusive. The
influence of other factors such as unequal access to technology could not be
ruled out.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
230 Frank, Toland and Schenk
The CQU analysis found evidence of a greater usage of email by students from
an individualistic culture, as opposed to students from a collectivist culture.
Collectivist students appear to send different types of messages. They tend to
ask more questions than individualist students and their questions are more likely
to focus on group formation and clarification of assignment ambiguity. The
individualistic students are more likely to volunteer answers than the collectivist
students. Anxiety over appropriateness of one’s answer may contribute to
collectivist students’ reluctance to volunteer answers.
As both studies were of a limited sample of individualist/collectivist students in
the Pacific region, generalization of these findings should be treated with caution.
This quantitative survey suggests reluctance by students from a collectivist
background to use email for teaching and learning, although there is a widespread
social use of email. A useful follow up would be to carry out qualitative research,
interviewing students and academics to gain a more in-depth understanding of
the reasons for some of the observed behaviors. Additional research in this area
is important as we expand teaching across cultural boundaries through the use
of distance learning.
References
Anakwe, U. et al. (1999). Distance learning and cultural diversity: Potential
users’ perspective. International Journal Of Organizational Analysis,
7(3), 224-244.
Badaracco, J. L., Jr. (1991). The Knowledge Link: How Firms Compete
through Strategic Alliances. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School
Press.
Bannon, L. J. (1995). Issues in computer-supported collaborative learning. In C.
O’Malley (Ed.), Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (pp. 267281). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
Daniel, J. S. (1996). Mega-Universities and Knowledge Media: Technology
Strategies for Higher Education. London: Kogan Page.
Davis, C. H., McMaster, J. and Nowak, J. (2002). IT-enabled services as
development drivers in low-income countries: The case of Fiji. The
Electronic Journal on Information Systems in Developing Countries,
9(4), 1-18.
Dubé, L. and Paré, G. (2001). Global virtual teams. Communications of the
ACM, 44(12), 71-73.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
The Effect of Culture on Email Use 231
Freedman, K. and Liu, M. (1996). The importance of computer experience,
learning processes, and communication patterns in multicultural networking. Educational Technology Research and Development, 44(1), 43-59.
Gudykunst W. B. (1997). Cultural variability in communication. Communication
Research, 24(4), 327-348.
Guy, R. K. (1991). Distance education and the developing world: Colonisation,
collaboration and control. In T. D. Evans and B. King (Eds.), Beyond the
Text: Contemporary Writing on Distance Education (pp. 152-175).
Geelong, Australia: Deakin University Press.
Handel, J. (1998). Hints for teachers. Centre for the Enhancement of Teaching and Learning, University of the South Pacific.
Hofstede, G. (1994). Cultures and Organisations. New York: Harper Collins.
Holden, N. J. (2002). Cross-Cultural Management: A Knowledge Management Perspective. London: Prentice Hall.
Jarvenpaa, S. L. and Leidner, D. (1998, June). Communication and trust in global
virtual teams. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 3(4).
Jin, Z. et al. (1998). Bridging US-China cross-cultural differences using Internet
and groupware technologies. The 7 th International Association for
Management of Technology Annual Conference. Retrieved from the
World Wide Web: http://www.cim-oem.com/bridge_8c18c.html.
Jones, A. (1999). The Asian Learner — An Overview of Approaches to
Learning. Working Paper Series, Teaching and Learning, Unit Faculty of
Economics and Commerce, University of Melbourne. Retrieved from the
World Wide Web: http://www.ecom.unimelb.edu.au/tluwww/
workingPapers/theAsianLearner.htm.
Jones, D. (1996). Solving some problems of university education: A case study.
In R. Debreceny and A. Ellis (Eds.), Proceedings of AusWeb’96 (pp. 243252). Lismore, NSW: Norsearch.
Jones, D. (1999). Solving some problems with university education: Part II.
AusWeb99, the 5th Australian World Wide Web Conference. Retrieved
from the World Wide Web: http://ausweb.scu.edu.au/aw99.
Landbeck, R. et al. (2000). Distance learners of the South Pacific: Study
strategies, learning conditions, and consequences for course design. Journal of Distance Education, 15, 1.
Liang, A. and McQueen, R. J. (1999). Computer assisted adult interactive
learning in a multi-cultural environment. Adult Learning, 11(1), 26-29.
Lockwood, F. et al. (2000, August). Review of Distance and Flexible Learning
at the University of the South Pacific. Report submitted to the Vice
Chancellor and senior staff at the University of the South Pacific.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
232 Frank, Toland and Schenk
Lynch, T., Szorengi, N. and Lodhia, S. (2002). Adoption of information technologies in Fiji: Issues in the study of cultural influences on information
technology adoption. Conference on Information Technology in Regional areas, Rockhampton, Australia.
Materi, R. A. (2000). The African virtual university — An overview. Ingenia
Training.
Matthewson, C. et al. (1998). Designing the rebbelib: Staff development in a
Pacific multicultural environment. In C. Latchem and F. Lockwood (Eds.),
Staff Development in Open and Flexible Learning. London: Routledge.
Myers, M. and Tan, F. (2002). Beyond models of national culture in information
systems research. Journal of Global Information Management, 10(1),
24-32.
Olutimayin, J. (2002). Adopting modern information technology in the South
Pacific: A process of development, preservation, or underdevelopment of
the culture. Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing
Countries, 9(3), 1-12.
Pacific Islands Development Program/East-West Center (2001). Fiji Battling
Education War At Tertiary Level. Retrieved from the World Wide Web:
http://166.122.164.43/archive/2001/February/02-19-11.htm.
Purcell, F. and Toland, J. (2004). Electronic commerce for the South Pacific: A
review of e-readiness. Electronic Commerce Research Journal, 4(3)
(Forthcoming).
Romm, C. et al. (2001). Searching for a “killer application” for on-line teaching
— Or are we? Proceedings of AMCIS2001, Boston, Massachusetts,
USA.
Samuelowicz, K. (1987). Learning problems of overseas students: Two sides of
a story. Higher Education Research and Development, 6, 121-134.
Tan, B. C. Y., Wei, K. K., Watson, R. T. and Walczuch, R. M. (1998). Reducing
status effects with computer-mediated communication: Evidence from two
distinct national cultures. Journal of Management Information Systems,
15, 1.
Warschauer, M. (1996). Comparing face-to-face and electronic discussion in
the second language classroom. CALICO Journal, 13(2), 7-26.
Watkins, D. et al. (1991). The Asian learner as a rote learner stereotype: Myth
or reality? Educational Psychology, 11(1), 21-34.
Weick, K. E. (1979). The Social Psychology of Organizing (2nd Edition).
New York: McGraw-Hill.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
The Effect of Culture on Email Use 233
Woodward, T. (2000). Paraphrased from a speech by Taina Woodward, a Fijian
citizen, presented at the Beijing + 5 Conference, United Nations, New York
City, 8 June 2000.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
234 Frank, Toland and Schenk
Section III
Building an Organization
for Successful Distance
Educations Programs
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
A Strategy to Expand the University Education Paradigm 235
Chapter XII
A Strategy to Expand
the University
Education Paradigm
Richard Ryan
University of Oklahoma, USA
Abstract
To date most online content and experiences have been packaged in a
traditional “class” format and delivered using a web site posted on a
provider’s server. This chapter suggests a slight deviation from this
approach for packaging and delivering Internet education. It suggests a
look beyond the “class” delivery approach. The premise for this strategy
is the belief that the greatest strength of the Internet for education may lie
in delivery of class “components,” not classes, themselves. These online
components can be used to supplement and add value to the traditional
class experience, not replace it. The strategy proposes that the university
provide, sponsor, administer and maintain an automated online portal to
post and sell faculty-created material. An “e-store” selling products
developed by the university’s faculty members. It is hoped that universities
will explore this idea to develop new ways of packaging and delivering
education that better reward the faculty developer, help pay for the service
and also add “value” to the education experience.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
236 Ryan
Moving Beyond the First Phase
The Internet is maturing as a delivery medium for university education. The
previous phase entailed developing a presence. It was the push to “have a web
site.” It is hoped that we have moved beyond this necessary step into the next
phase. It is also hoped that this current phase will bring exploration of ways for
university education developers and users to harness and optimize the emerging
capabilities of the Internet to add “value” to the education experience. New
ways of packaging, selling and delivering education hopefully will be explored.
“Online instruction can offer new challenges and opportunities to both students
and instructors. Most students do not view online instruction as replacement for
traditional classroom instruction. However, with the right subject matter, with the
right instructor or facilitator, and for the right student, Internet or online classes
can provide an effective educational environment and offer a viable alternative
to traditional classroom instruction” (Cooper, 2001).
Today there are great opportunities for creating enriched classes combining
traditional and online resources. Traditional methods of presenting information
in the classroom are very limited when compared to what can be done today in
an online interactive, automated format using the Internet. The potential for
online experiences to supplement, replace or exceed traditional classroom
experiences becomes more apparent as technology advances and new efforts
are placed online. Advanced web development and online database capabilities
combined with adequate bandwidth, provide greater opportunity to optimize
interactive Internet capabilities. Instructional design of online learning and
assessment can incorporate database capabilities to deliver and administer
information or exercises, automatically assess performance, track the results
and provide immediate feedback to the user and/or Instructor. This online model
is very efficient for performance-based learning and assessment.
To date most online content and experiences have been packaged in a traditional
“class” format and delivered using a web site posted on a provider’s server.
Server space, the input format and operation of the web site, is provided typically
by a university or commercial portal. Purchase (if required), access and delivery
are traditional, except for the anywhere/anytime advantage of the Internet. In
many cases universities provide this service to their students using a courseware
“shell.”
This chapter suggests a slight deviation from this approach for packaging and
delivering Internet education. The idea represents a shift in the existing online
education paradigm. Instead of just substantiating “why we should shift,” this
chapter suggests a model to look beyond the “class” delivery approach. The
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
A Strategy to Expand the University Education Paradigm 237
premise for this strategy is the belief that the greatest strength of the Internet for
education may lie in delivery of class “components,” not classes. The online
components can be used to supplement and add value to the traditional class
experience, not replace it. The Internet provides new opportunities to do things
that can’t be done in the traditional classroom setting. It provides access to
resources that otherwise could not be explored and used. The strategy suggested
in this chapter raises many questions about existing education delivery. Many of
the answers involve decisions about cost and payment and the job description of
educators. It should be noted that the suggested strategy is intended to complement existing traditional and online education with the hope of making the
experience better. “For the university, the transition to an Internet-based
learning environment requires a restatement of institutional missions and priorities, a revision of conventional structures. For the instructor and student, online
courses represent a shift in educational philosophy and instructional design as the
emphasis moves from ‘teaching’ to ‘learning’, leading to a student-centered,
rather than instructor-based system. The challenge for higher education is to find
the best way to adjust to this paradigm” (Onay, 2002).
The strategy discussed in this chapter proposes that the university provide,
sponsor, administer and maintain an automated online portal to post and sell
faculty-created material. An “e-store,” selling products developed by the
university’s faculty members. The web site could be organized like the university’s
bookstore. The university would act as the “publisher” for the faculty. This
approach would also maintain the traditional university’s territorial position and
claim to resources.
The proposed strategy has three potential benefits:
•
Improve the quality and expand the amount of resources for university
teaching/learning.
•
•
Provide the developer with a financial incentive.
Provide the service provider with a financial incentive.
The purpose of this chapter is to outline a strategy for faculty development and
university online delivery of supplemental university class materials. As part of
this strategy, a royalty is paid to the content developer and the university
provider. This plan provides financial incentives to both the faculty member and
university. This is a potential source of “new money” for the university. It is
hoped that universities will explore this idea to develop new ways of packaging
and delivering education that better reward the faculty developer, help pay for
the service and also add “value” to the education experience.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
238 Ryan
Potential “Value” of Online Teaching/
Learning Components
Teaching/Learning Components
It has been substantiated by numerous studies that anywhere/anytime access to
resources is the greatest advantage (and that the lack of interaction is the
greatest disadvantage) of education delivery using the Internet. In order to avoid
redundancy to confirm these points, subsequent discussion about “promoting and
stimulating” and “assessment and evaluating” learning will build upon these
assumptions.
For this discussion, teaching/learning components are considered independent
exercises, experiences or activities that are incorporated together to comprise
the class content. They can be done independently or in conjunction with other
resources. Regardless of the delivery method, classes are usually a combination
of teaching/learning components crafted together by the Instructor and delivered
over the duration of the class. The following discussion outlines two primary
ways that online teaching/learning components can add “value” to educational
experiences.
Promoting and Stimulating Learning
Computer games are popular interactive “engagers,” using sound, action and an
input device. Players typically are not only trying to do something right, but also
trying to do it in the least amount of time. This promotes a form of competition,
whether with oneself or with others. Interactive automated instructional designs
using competition as an engager have not been explored. This is also an excellent
teaching technique to promote assimilating information, making a decision and
enacting the solution. As stated by Marc Prensky in his book, Digital GameBased Learning, by marrying the engagement of games and entertainment with
the content of learning and training, it is possible to fundamentally improve the
nature of education and training for students and trainees (Prensky, 2001).
A “game” approach to delivery of content has great potential to engage the user
in many ways to promote and stimulate learning. Especially when most of the
users are from a generation that has always played commercially available
computer games. The interactive “game” approach can be used to help
compensate for the missing Instructor or the lack of perceived necessary
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
A Strategy to Expand the University Education Paradigm 239
interaction. Instructional design can use an interactive “front-end” to deliver the
content to be learned. This approach can be used not only to communicate
information, but also to engage and motivate the user. Exercises can be designed
to use multimedia Internet capabilities for audio and animation and the computer
mouse or keyboard for input or information manipulation. All of this is “housed”
in an automated online platform which gathers immediate feedback regarding the
user’s input. Expanded performance measurement, such as number of tries or
time to complete, can be used as motivators to stimulate learning and develop
greater proficiency.
Assessing and Evaluating Learning
Commercial portals are taking advantage of advancements in technology and
expanded bandwidth to administer online assessment. Student appraisal, career
appraisal, personal appraisal, standardized testing and diagnostic assessment are
all offered online. Basic operation steps for these assessments include online
input from the user, database manipulation of this input and automatic feedback
to the user. Delivery and assessment are database driven and very efficient and
economical to administer and document. This operation strategy has the potential
to be a very suitable model for online education delivery and assessment. It also
has great potential for “real time” training and online assessment of proficiency.
Traditional assessment only measures correctness, not time and attempts
needed to successfully complete the exercise. A fast time with minimal tries can
demonstrate proficiency, as well as subject mastery.
One of the greatest features that can be included in an interactive, automated
online experience is immediate feedback to the user. The delivery can be set up
so that the user knows immediately if a choice that he/she made is correct. This
is an excellent way to use assessment as a teaching mechanism. This is very
different from the traditional paper assignment where the user turns in a hard
copy and does not get it back graded for perhaps several days. By then the user
must refocus on the topic. The immediate feedback that can be built-in to the
exercise using automation adds great value to the learning process. The learning
is still content-based, but the interactivity offers the user a much more engaging,
real-time, feedback-influenced, self-paced learning experience. This approach
is appropriate for many subjects, particularly visual-based processes, such as
laboratory or simulation exercises.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
240 Ryan
Examples of Online Teaching/Learning
Components
Interactive, Automated Construction Teaching/Learning
Components
The following is a brief description of three online automated interactive
exercises using immediate feedback as part of the instructional design. A brief
explanation follows each. A class assignment to complete these online exercises
was made to 34 undergraduate University of Oklahoma Construction Science
students in the Fall 2001 Construction Administration class. This group of users
was selected because of their common standing in the construction program.
Participants had completed the Materials and Methods and Construction Equipment and Methods classes covering information about tilt-up construction and
crane parts. It was known that this group of students had minimal exposure to
project management strategies and that the Project Management exercise would
be the most challenging. This group was also selected because of their known
access to workstations with Macromedia Shockwave Player and computers with
speakers.
Based on study results, users overwhelmingly thought that these types of
exercises were appropriate for construction education. “The unanimous perception of students and Instructors that these types of exercises are appropriate for
construction education is a strong reason for further exploration and development. The automated delivery is ideal for incorporation into existing construction
class contents and structures. Interactive components can be used to engage the
user differently than traditional exercises” (Ryan, 2002). The majority of the
users felt that these types of exercises were appropriate for assessment and
testing. Most users felt the interactive component enhanced their involvement.
Most would rather do online interactive exercises than traditional hard-copy
exercises. The concrete tilt up exercise was considered the most enjoyable of the
three exercises. For further discussion of this study, see the URL in the
References section at the end of the chapter.
Exercise 1: Identify the Crawler Crane Parts
The objective of this exercise is to match the correct name of the crane part on
the right to the designated part in the image of the crane on the left.
A picture of the crawler crane is displayed on the left of the screen. Ten parts
of the crane are marked with red lines with a green dot on the right end. The dot
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
A Strategy to Expand the University Education Paradigm 241
Figure 1.
end is a sensitive spot for the drag and drop. Ten blue bars with a dot on the left
end are located on the right side of the screen. Each bar is labeled with the name
of a crane part. The names are not in order and are randomly located on the
screen. This dot end is a sensitive spot for drag and drop. The user is instructed
to drag a particular part name and drop it on the appropriate part noted in the
image. The user must match the blue dot to the green dot corresponding to the
correct part. If the user’s choice is correct, the dots stick. If the choice is wrong,
the blue bar repels back to its original location. The user can drag and drop the
bars in any chosen order. A timer is not visible, but time to complete is shown on
the certificate of completion.
This is a content-based exercise paced by the user. It is a matching exercise. The
user has to associate all of the right parts to the crane correctly before the
exercise is complete. This forces the user to at least read the part name and at
least see it on the image, even if for just a moment.
Exercise 2: Sequence the Activities for Concrete Tilt-up Construction
The objective of this exercise is for the user to sequence images of the concrete
tilt-up construction process in the order of their occurrence.
Exercises that involve visual recognition for sequencing or arranging activities
are ideal teaching tools for construction. This exercise is generic with images
easily replaced to depict another activity or set of activities.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
242 Ryan
Figure 2.
Ten pictures of the tilt-up concrete construction process are displayed on the top
of the screen. The user is instructed to drag and drop the pictures into the
respective gray boxes numbered one to ten on the bottom of the screen in the
chronological order of occurrence. The user must place the images in the correct
order of occurrence in the process. If the user’s choice is correct, the image
sticks. If the choice is wrong, the image returns back to its original location.
“Mouse-over” activated text boxes appear when the mouse is placed on a
particular picture. The green text box describes the activity in the picture. The
text boxes are hints to help the user differentiate between the pictures and to help
sequence them order. The descriptions were added to help users identify details
in the pictures due to the limited image size.
A timer is placed at the bottom of the screen to add a competitive element to the
experience. The timer activates as soon as the user enters the exercise frame.
The purpose of the timer is to motivate the user.
An audio file is activated in the background before the user begins the exercise.
Text bullets highlighting the tilt-up construction process transition onto the screen
individually as the audio file is played. This is done to refresh the user’s thoughts
about tilt-up construction before starting the exercise.
As the user performs the exercise every mismatch is recorded. The time and
number of tries is posted to the database at the completion of the exercise. The
user is given a “Certificate of Completion” at the end of the exercise summarizing his or her performance, including time to complete and number of tries.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
A Strategy to Expand the University Education Paradigm 243
Figure 3.
Exercise 3: Project Management Activity Sequencing
The project management exercise is the most complex of the three exercises.
The objective of this exercise is to prioritize 13 project management activities
based on perceived importance. User priorities are compared to the priority
placed on the activity by an “expert.”
The user is to assume the perspective of a construction Project Manager. The
user types their perceived priority (1-13) in the gray box to the immediate right
of the activity. The number one activity is considered to be the most important
and is the first that should be done. This exercise is not timed.
The “back-end” part of the exercise is programmed with an expert’s views on
the priorities that these activities should be assigned. It should be noted that the
expert’s opinion is a reflection of a particular thought process about the activities.
Once all activities have been prioritized and submitted, the “back-end” program
calculates the variance of the user’s answers from those of the expert.
For example, if the user assigns a priority of five and the expert assigns a priority
of eight, the variance is three. The variance is displayed for each activity. The
total variance for all thirteen activities is displayed at the bottom right of the
screen. A perfect score is a variance equaling zero. The user is offered a chance
to resubmit a solution. It is hoped that the user will evaluate their initial
performance by looking at the variances for each activity and attempt a second
try to reduce the total variance.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
244 Ryan
At the end of the exercise, an audio file explains the expert’s logic. The activities
transition onto the screen individually as the expert explains why the activity
priority was assigned. The user can control the rate of the explanation. The
explanation is structured to promote better understanding of the topic. It is hoped
that the expert’s opinion will provoke thoughts about why the user’s approach
differed and lead to better understanding of the concepts. The model is an
excellent interactive platform for information delivery and thought provocation.
The “Hole” in the Online Component
Development Process
Most supplemental online materials and exercises created by faculty are
currently offered as part of the content of the “class.” Based on the author’s
exploration of online university class offerings, the majority of these efforts
include converted PowerPoint slides, converted document files and links to
online resources. Many faculty use class web sites created using university
provided “shells” for e-mail and communication. These efforts are very helpful,
but do not demand too much time and effort to develop and post. Development
of online interactive, automated components like the construction exercises,
takes much more time, effort and expertise, but can add great “value” to the
education experience. However, currently there is really no focus on the
development of teaching/learning experiences like these that utilize emerging
multimedia resources and interactive, automated delivery.
As is the case of the development of the construction exercises, the developer
absorbed the extra time and effort to develop and coordinate the online resource
to try to make the class experience better. It has been recognized for many years
that the “hole” in development and use of online class components is that there
is a mismatch in the relationship between the time the developer spends creating
the resource and the reward for this effort. “By providing incentives such as
release time, mini-grants, continuing education stipends, and recognition in the
promotion and tenure process, faculty will have more than ‘verbal’ encouragement to continue, or begin, using distance education technologies and will have
reasons to do so” (Murphrey and Dooley, 2000). If the development of these
types of experiences is to be promoted, universities should continue exploring
strategies to reward developers for this effort.
An observed trend among early university developers of online educational
components is to “back away” from further development under the traditional
university class model. If faculty are fundamentally paid to “chalk and talk,” does
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
A Strategy to Expand the University Education Paradigm 245
the teaching job description require the creation and use of online material? At
a minimum, why is using available courseware for communication in a class not
mandatory or considered part of the job description? Why is Internet use for
teaching not a measured performance category? Based on the author’s personal
experience, why do faculty have trouble getting credit for this type of effort for
tenure and promotion? There is no pay differentiation between faculty that “use”
the Internet in their classes and faculty that don’t. Because of the questionable
support for these efforts, more university developers are seeking other emerging
venues to host their work and get paid for the development effort. Commercial
portals are being created that cater to the education market, drawing upon the
Internet development talents of university faculty. “As the number and type of
organizations engaged in Internet-based instruction rises, competition among elearning providers is likely to increase. Traditional universities are therefore no
longer indifferent to the push of new technologies and confront the challenge of
redefining their strategies in the 21st century” (Onay, 2002).
The business model of these commercial portals is a royalty payment for each
user of the online material, component or class. The evolution of this commercial
market is just beginning. If universities do not incorporate a means for faculty to
recoup the cost of development effort, these emerging portals, to some unknown
degree, will fill that role and reap the benefit. This is worthy of consideration,
since most universities already have the infrastructure in place to provide the
service. The business part of an e-store can be easily integrated into existing
processes.
The University E-Store
The Idea
The university e-store idea evolved after the study exploring perceptions of users
about the delivery format, operation, content and potential for use of the three
construction exercises discussed previously. Requests by others to use the
exercises and the favorable user response led to the idea of selling the exercises
as class components. The desire for compensation due to the large amount of
effort that was required to create the exercises was a primary catalyst. The
whole process of component development, selling and purchase is similar to
publishing and buying a book. Components, such as the construction exercises,
could be sold in an online store hosted by the university. This idea currently has
elevated relevance due to the unfavorable financial status of most universities.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
246 Ryan
E-Store Products
The items or activities listed below are possible components for a class, another
university’s class or for an independent user. University faculty members
provide many of these components today. All are very suitable for Internet
delivery. A component might be required as part of the class syllabus, offered
as a supplemental resource or posted for the user’s convenience. Bear in mind
that not only does the user purchase the component, but also the anytime/
anywhere access. Many users would pay a small fee for this convenience alone.
The following products might be sold in the e-store.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
web sites
multimedia exercises
multimedia labs
publications
slide or picture libraries
course packets
note packets
exam reviews
practice exams
certification exam reviews
lecture videos
guest lecture or special presentation videos
The Business Model
The user goes to the university online e-store portal. The e-store is organized like
the university bookstore. Components are accessible by the class in which they
are required or organized for purchase by others. Purchase is a typical online
transaction using a credit card or charge to the purchaser’s university account.
The business model would be the same as a bookstore. The university provides
the business end for the Internet portal. Purchase, payment, use and completion
of components are automated, requiring no human intervention. The service
could be easily integrated into existing university accounting, technology and
Internet management processes. For most components the fee would be small,
two dollars to five dollars. The user would also absorb the cost of printing or
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
A Strategy to Expand the University Education Paradigm 247
reproduction. As proven by the proliferation of commercial Internet portals built
for online purchasing, this business model is very efficient and cost effective.
From the university’s perspective new revenue can be generated without a great
increase in cost. Existing staff and the in-place online university infrastructure
can be used, for the most part. The source of the transaction, the e-store, would
be the only addition to the accounting infrastructure that most universities
already have in place.
From a developer’s perspective the most important part of this model is the
payment or reward for the effort to develop and post the online materials. A
royalty is charged each time a component is used. This would fill the “hole” in
the development process. Though the royalties on a “semester-by-semester”
basis are not large, the longer term compensation is a much greater incentive for
developing “value” by adding class experiences. The following are additional
examples of possible online components and the potential financial incentive for
the developer and the university.
Example 1: The obvious place to explore this model is in large, general education
classes. Three hundred chemistry students in Chemistry 101 are required to do
a series of 10 online interactive virtual labs. Each student is charged two dollars
for each use of the 10 online labs. Three hundred students times 10 uses each
equals 3,000 (300 X 10 = 3,000) uses during the semester. Three thousand uses
times two dollars for each use equals six thousand dollars per semester (3,000
X $2 = $6,000). As a royalty, the developer receives $2,400/semester (40%) and
the university receives $3,600/semester (approximately 60%).
Example 2: The instructor creates a web site, http://cns.ou.edu/cns2913/, for
the CNS2913 Construction Equipment and Methods class. Content is customized
to meet the needs of the class, including text, links, images, video and audio. The
web site is not a class, but a component of a class. It is a supplemental class
resource, like a textbook. However, the web site is used as the primary reference
for lectures and class discussion. The Instructor has requests from other faculty
at other universities to use the web site in their classes. Until the web site is
published as a book or compact disk and sold, the developer receives nothing for
this extra effort and enhancement of his/her class.
The following return might be possible. At the start of the spring semester 40
users pay a $50 fee for access to the web site. It is required in the syllabus, just
like a text. Forty users times $50 per user equals $2,000 (40 X $50 = $2,000). The
developer receives 40% or $800. The university receives 60% or $1,200. Most
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
248 Ryan
faculty will take the extra pay, considering they would probably furnish the web
site without reward to enhance the class experience.
There is potential for an interesting situation to develop. If the developer posts
the web site on a commercial education portal, can he/she require students to buy
access as a part of their university class? The obvious alternative to be explored
would be for the university to host the web site in the e-store and reap the
benefits, along with the developer.
Example 3: This example is similar to Example 2. A hard-copy Construction
Administration Study Guide is required for the CNS 3113, Construction Administration class each Fall semester. The Instructor compiled the study guide,
because there was not a suitable text for the course. The hard-copy guide
contains text discussion, paperwork examples from an existing construction
company in Dallas and other supporting documents. The guide is purchased at
the bookstore for the copying and handling fee.
A web site contains the Study Guide, links to other construction administration
resources and four online automated reviews that must be completed in order to
advance through the web site content. A $45 fee is charged to the user for access
to the site. The primary audience will vary between 35 and 45 users each fall
semester.
Example 4: A review exam is offered online to all graduating seniors in the
Construction Science program prior to sitting for the Certified Profession
Constructors Associate Level Exam. All of the seniors are required to take the
exam. The review exam is automated, with links to explanations and other
information. A $15 fee is charged to take the online review exam. The primary
audience will vary between 20 and 30 users each semester. There is also great
potential for non-university individuals sitting for the exam to use the review.
Most of the components listed in the E-store Online Components section exist
today in some form or another. However, online delivery offers new ways to use
these resources. Access 24/7 is probably the most obvious reason that this
strategy has merit. “Convenience” is the driver. Many users will be willing to pay
two dollars to five dollars to access class components at their leisure or for
resources that add value to their education experience. This is particularly true
if the components are more engaging than sitting in a class watching someone
else do it or talk about it. The cost for the component could perhaps be viewed
as a service fee or a tax for not attending the traditional class or needing
supplemental resources. This added cost might have a double-edged result.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
A Strategy to Expand the University Education Paradigm 249
Some users might react too positively and abuse the availability and not attend
classes at all. Others might attend class more regularly, in order to avoid spending
additional money.
Selling one component is obviously not a dedicated market to which applying
resources is worth the effort. The idea becomes more feasible, however, if there
is one dedicated person organizing and programming for 100 class components
posted in the e-store each semester.
Observations and Conclusions
Recouping the Cost
Many will view the e-store as “passing another cost on to students.” It is. This
model suggests a broader approach to providing “value” to education and
recouping the cost for the developer and provider. It is different, but not so
different that it can’t fit into the current approach to university education.
Computers were added as part of the university service with “new money”
generated from passing the cost on to the students. Creation and delivery of
interactive, automated online content is a service that has costs. The cost is being
passed on to the faculty and university now, but not to the users.
Compensating the Developer
A primary benefit of this strategy is the opportunity for developers to receive
compensation for online development efforts. This strategy answers the question
of “reward for effort” that has loomed since the idea of using online materials
to supplement education began. The university also creates another “revenue
generator” that can be easily integrated into existing business structures.
It is hoped that this simple financial reward system will provide incentive for
faculty to create better online material and experiences to enhance education.
The unanimous perception that the construction exercises are appropriate for
construction education is a strong reason for further exploration and development. Automated online delivery is ideal for incorporation into existing classes.
Interactive components can be used to engage users differently than traditional
exercises. The project management exercise demonstrates an instructional
design provoking thought, as well as assessment, to enhance the learning
experience.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
250 Ryan
Will there be a proliferation of inferior quality class components? Issues of
quality and content can be dealt with in a traditional manner. As stated in previous
work, “Quality expectations for online and lecture classes should be the same for
the classes to be considered equal” (Ryan, 2002). Online class components
should be judged with the same considerations as similar class components used
now. Like a text, if a resource is good, others will use it, too. It should be noted
that like any resource used in a class, selection should be made based on the
appropriateness for the teaching/learning objective.
Exploring Instructional Design Using “Adaptive
Delivery”
The Internet is an ideal medium for using computer adaptive testing. “With
computer adaptive tests, the examinee’s ability level relative to a norm group can
be interactively estimated during the testing process and items can be selected
based on the current ability estimate. Examinees can be given the items that
maximize the information (within constraints) about their ability levels from the
item responses” (Rudner, 1998). Computer adaptive testing is a “stepping stone”
for instructional design incorporating “adaptive delivery.” Online teaching/
learning experiences can be crafted so that the type, style and difficulty of
information delivered automatically adjust to the skills, pace and understanding
of the user. This is a “new frontier” for education.
As this instructional design evolves, so will online products using this delivery.
Embracing this opportunity offers a chance for the university to lead in this effort
and pay itself and the developer, too. It is also a strong possibility that if
universities do not embrace this opportunity, commercial online education portals
will.
Opportunity to Use Continuing Education Programs for
the E-Store
Most university Continuing Education (CE) programs have online class offerings
in place. Typically, these programs have web developers and programmers and
host their own servers for online delivery. They are also many times selfsupported and an independent entity within the university system. The e-store
strategy could be easily incorporated into the CE approach, structure and
operation. Most processes and procedures are in place for control, operation and
tracking of online offerings. CE could manage the product purchase and access.
Quality and delivery can be monitored using in-place criteria. Due to the self-
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
A Strategy to Expand the University Education Paradigm 251
supporting nature of most CE programs, their entrepreneurial motivation will
probably be stronger due to self-preservation. These factors provide an ideal
environment to explore the e-store strategy.
The University’s Role
Many things will influence implementation of an e-store strategy. The commercialism of this strategy for one university or multiple universities as a group is
unexplored. It is obvious, because of the blossoming Internet medium, how much
more can be done to enhance the learning using images, video, sound, interactive
automation, simulation, animation and information linking. However, this development and opportunity to add “value” to teaching/learning comes with a price.
Shifting the paradigm to address this cost raises several issues that will prompt
diverse reactions from users, developers and providers. It is up to universities to
study the merits of this idea. This strategy is another possible step in the on-going
development of university Internet education delivery and use.
References
Cooper, L. W. (2001, March). A comparison of online and traditional computer
applications classes. Technological Horizons in Education Journal, 5258.
Murphrey, T. P. and Dooley, K. E. (2000). Perceived strengths, weaknesses,
opportunities, and threats impacting the diffusion of distance education
technologies for Colleges of Agriculture in land grant institutions. Journal
of Agricultural Education, 41(4), 39-50.
Onay, Z. (2002). Leveraging Distance Education Through the Internet: A
Paradigm Shift in Higher Education: The Design and Management of
Effective Distance Learning Programs, Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing.
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital Game Based Learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Rudner, L. M. (1998). An on-line, interactive, computer adaptive testing
tutorial. Retrieved November 1998 from the World Wide Web: http://
ericae.net/scripts/cat.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
252 Ryan
Ryan, R. (2002a). Instructional Design and Use of Interactive Online Construction Exercises. Associated Schools of Construction Proceedings of the
38th Annual Conference. Retrieved April 11-13, 2002 from the World
Wide Web: http://asceditor.unl.edu/archives/2002/ryan02.htm.
Ryan, R. (2002b). Quality Assurance of Online Courses. The Design and
Management of Effective Distance Learning Programs. Hershey, PA:
Idea Group Publishing.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Return on Investment for Distance Education Offerings
253
Chapter XIII
Return on Investment
for Distance Education
Offerings: Developing a
Cost Effective Model
Evan T. Robinson
Shenandoah University School of Pharmacy, USA
Abstract
The basis for this chapter is to identify ways in which institutions can
maximize their return on investment for distance education offerings
through the appropriate and timely re-purposing of the online content for
different markets. This will be presented based upon a model of the
author’s design titled, “Transformative Income Generation,” which is a
combination of content re-purposing based upon an understanding of the
various potential markets in an entrepreneurial manner. The model being
presented represents one way to maximize return on investment and, while
other ways exist, it is the author’s intention to stimulate the reader to
consider online educational content, albeit distance education materials,
from a different perspective.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
254
Robinson
Introduction
The intent of action is the achievement of something decisive. When war
becomes inevitable, those involved seek to achieve a quick and decisive victory.
When a business introduces a new product, it does so with the intent of being
successful, profitable and capitalizing on the research and development that led
to the product’s development. The rougher the market, the more instability in the
economy, the more businesses need to capitalize on what works and make sure
that it can survive the lean times. Well, higher education is a business operating
within an economy that is challenging at best.
The recent state of the economy has led to some challenging times in higher
education. The turbulence of the stock market, coupled with challenges of
student recruitment and increased competition, has some colleges and universities actively seeking ways to increase revenue. According to a recent report by
Standard and Poors, the turbulence of the financial market has placed a financial
strain on many institutions due to a decrease in the return on endowment
revenues (Peloquin-Dodd and Stern, 2002). The problem is considerably more
evident for smaller colleges and universities that have a smaller endowment and
a leaner budget than those programs with extremely large endowments that can
better weather a drop in endowment contributions. For an example of the
financial problems facing higher education, one needs to only read the Chronicle
of Higher Education to see mention of staff layoffs and cuts to faculty and
graduate programs. Given the challenges facing higher education, it begs the
question as to how institutions can become more financially stable and less
susceptible to the economic rollercoaster that is currently the ride most institutions are on.
The challenge comes in the form of reduced budgets due to financial difficulties
and the fact that technology costs can be an easy target when the money gets
tight. What inevitably happens is that the resources get reallocated and those
programs dependent on technology either limp along with what is currently
available or are provided with marginal increases that support the current
infrastructure, but do not allow for any improvements. This should necessitate
the wise use of reusable resources, one of which is the material developed for
distance education.
It has been suggested that by 2004, almost 85% of two- and four-year programs
will be teaching online. According to the Council on Higher Education Accreditation (2001) of the 5,655 accredited institutions, 1,979 now offer a form of
distance-delivered programs (35%). The escalation of distance education
offerings reinforces the reality that for those programs that are already online,
more competition is on the horizon and these programs should seek to leverage
their position to the best of their ability.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Return on Investment for Distance Education Offerings
255
The costs associated with the development of online distance education materials necessitates that the materials must be used as many times as possible to
maximize the return on investment based upon the costs to produce these
materials. With the marketplace becoming more competitive, it is imperative that
the costs associated with delivering online distance education be spread out over
multiple markets, as well as over time. This multiple market approach brings to
light the idea that entrepreneurship may have a place within higher education and
that more consideration needs to be given to multiple markets and out-of-the-box
thinking.
The basis for this chapter is to identify ways in which institutions can maximize
their return on investment for distance education offerings through the appropriate and timely re-purposing of the online content for different markets. This will
be presented based upon a model of the author’s design titled, “Transformative
Income Generation,” which is a combination of content re-purposing based upon
an understanding of the various potential markets in an entrepreneurial manner
(Robinson, 2001). The various steps of the transformative income generation
model will be discussed in detail, along with examples of how it can be applied.
Within most sections the considerations or recommendations are subdivided into
business-to-consumer and business-to-business approaches, since the transformative income generation model utilizes both. The relationship of entrepreneurship will be discussed as it relates to the transformative income generation model,
as will some limitations or considerations to the model, as well. Scattered
throughout the chapter are “Helpful Hints,” which represent ideas to help with
the implementation of the model and the maximization of return on investment.
The model being presented represents one way to maximize return on investment
and, while other ways exist, it is the author’s intention to stimulate the reader to
consider online educational content, albeit distance education materials, from a
different perspective. According to Einstein, “Imagination is more important
than knowledge.” This represents an excellent perspective for the reader in that
out-of-the-box thinking and using one’s imagination will create new perspectives
on potential markets and help facilitate the maximization of return on investment
for distance education offerings.
Background
The cost of developing online content for distance education has long been a
question that has drawn attention as programs consider entering the distance
education arena. Some of the costs that have been identified include: technology
costs (both start-up and long-term), production costs, recurrent costs (software
and hardware upgrades), faculty development costs (conferences, workshops,
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
256
Robinson
etc.), faculty instruction costs (compensation for content provided), support
costs (help desk, server maintenance), and copyright costs (Morgan, 2001;
Morgan 2001). In essence, anything that can affect the cost of instruction should
be included in the determination of what it costs to deliver online distance
education. These costs can vary depending upon the type of e-commerce model
that is applied and the market that is selected.
According to Hartman et al. (2000), e-commerce can be defined as, “a particular
type of e-business initiative that is focused around individual business transactions that use the Net as medium of exchange, including business-to-business and
business-to-consumer.” It can be further differentiated as being, “... commonly
associated with buying and selling information, products, and services via the
Internet, but it is also used to transfer and share within organizations through
intranets to improve decision making and eliminate duplication of effort” (Fingar
et al., 2000). Business-to-business (B2B) models involve the sale or exchange
between two business entities while business-to-consumer (B2C) transactions
are those in which the consumer is the end-user (Taylor and Terhune, 2001). It
is the changing teaching methodologies and the turbulent financial times within
higher education that have opened up the possibilities of considering how B2B
and B2C models can provide increased revenue to institutions that are willing to
take calculated risks. The challenge lies in understanding how to maximize the
return on investment for online distance education offerings. The first part to that
understanding is to have a firm grasp on what it costs to develop online content.
A number of reference and/or worksheets are available to help determine how
much it will cost to deliver online content — an example is found in the handbooks
developed by Western Cooperative for Educational Telecommunications
(2001), which can provide a basis for understanding the challenges that can be
faced when integrating technology with the provision of education. The bigger
question, the one that is more controversial, is whether it is possible to generate
revenue and a subsequent profit via online distance education.
The means to maximizing return on investment for distance education offerings
is rooted in a process that evaluates the content in hand, how it is being used in
its current form and if it is being utilized to its fullest potential and, finally, if it can
be utilized in other ways so that the return on the investment to create online
content can be spread over a variety of uses. Designing, creating and releasing
content for one purpose to one market is cost ineffective unless that institution
has command over a large portion of the market. Applying the transformative
income generation model is one way to refute the assumption that the only way
to increase revenue via online distance education courses is to teaching to larger
classes. With the transformative income generation model, it is possible to
maximize the return on investment for distance education offerings by analyzing
existing or new content and determining the cost effectiveness of re-purposing
it to predetermined markets with a high chance for a solid return on investment.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Return on Investment for Distance Education Offerings
257
Transformative Income Generation
When one considers the amount of resources necessary to develop and deliver
online distance education, it only seems logical that every opportunity be explored
to allow for an institution to capitalize on its investment. Another way to consider
this is to consider how many different ways the expense of course development
and delivery can be used to generate revenue. The author would argue that most
institutions of higher education are content with one, maybe two ways to use
content, are constrained by the academic system in which the content was
developed, or are reluctant to embrace the “knowledge as commodity” concept.
The transformative income generation model, which will be abbreviated as TIG
for the rest of the chapter, is a means by which existing or developed content is
re-purposed into other markets to make the most efficient use of the content by
spreading the developmental costs over the largest possible number of users. It
requires avoiding conservative thinking and embracing out-of-the-box thinking
by not emulating your competition but, instead, focusing on areas that they have
not.
Within the TIG model, courses or content are considered as a “commodity”
which can be sold directly to the consumer (i.e., learner) or to another business.
In this respect then, the TIG model allows for the provision of content within both
business-to-consumer (B2C) and business-to-business (B2B) contexts. It is
about capitalizing on the value of e-content to the largest possible audience. In
this way, it might be interesting to think about the drivers within higher education
as relate to the TIG model. Should a college or university develop online content
and commit resources to the distance education program that supports 300 to 500
students, with the hope that the technology initiative will impact the onsite
campus? Or, does that same college or university commit resources to the onsite
program supporting 3,000 students and hope the technology initiative impacts the
provision of distance education to outside learners? The TIG model is about
facilitating this process so that the e-content that is available and re-purposed and
helps stimulate change and entrepreneurship while generating revenue.
The TIG model of re-purposing can be developed or implemented on the concept
of macro-to-micro re-utilization of educational content so that developing larger
blocks of online content in a modular fashion (modules, courses, capstones, etc.)
can be used in its entirety as the different subunits to provide a variety of
educational opportunities that can appeal to consumers or other businesses.
Within any number of disciplines the statements, “This class would make a good
continuing education program or certificate program” or “I bet someone else
would like this class in addition to our students” can always be heard. But those
conversations seldom seem to go any further. Applying the TIG model could help
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
258
Robinson
transition these discussions into action items by providing a mechanism that
makes it possible to turn ideas into outcomes.
Before introducing the first part of the TIG model, the reader should be advised
that maximizing the return on investment for distance education offerings can be
accomplished in a variety of ways. The TIG model represents one such means,
but as you read the chapter you should also consider how each part of the model
might be applied at your institution to facilitate increased revenue from developed
online materials. Parts of the model like Market Stratification could be done
without consideration of the rest of the model and, if applied correctly, could help
maximize return on investment. The key is to have an open mind to the
possibilities and to challenge yourself to think outside of the box.
Step 1: The Internal Audit
The internal audit should be done at least annually to ensure that financial benefit
can be gained from every possible opportunity. Once the audit process has been
completed, it may be possible to use the same process to review new courses or
content as they become available, as well as using it to plan for which materials
should be brought online because of their market potential.
The internal audit of the course(s) and other educational content (continuing
education, lifelong learning programs, etc.) can be broken into the following
categories: content currently taught online via distance education; content
currently taught online onsite, but could be modified for distance education and,
onsite, limited online or not-online content. The Content Audit Form should be
created with two additional columns, “Re-purpose Potential” and “Market
Potential,” which will be used during the Audit Analysis in the next section. An
example of the Content Audit Worksheet can be found in Figure 1.
The audit is not the time to decide which course(s) or content would work best
within the TIG model, but to first develop a comprehensive list of classes that fit
the generic profile of being taught online. Within an institution that offers a
degree online, the TIG model allows for the most flexibility because it has the
greatest degree of variability in terms of the number of potential markets. This
will be discussed in subsequent sections as to how an online degree-granting
institution could broker the entire degree to another institution while simultaneously selling the various courses to other programs, students, or in other forms
to other consumers. The reason for conducting the Internal Audit is to do the
groundwork for the analysis of the content and its market potential, which is done
within the Audit Analysis.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Return on Investment for Distance Education Offerings
259
Figure 1. Content Audit Worksheet
Content Area
Re-purpose Potential
Market Potential
Taught online via distance education
BAFI 513 – Investment and Portfolio Management
BUS 511 – International Business
MGT 525 – Current Issues in Health Care Mgmt.
Taught online onsite
MIS 501 – Decision Making Tools
MIS 523 – Data Base Systems
MKT 511 – Marketing Theory and Practice
Limited online or non-online content
BUS 515 – Business Law
ECN 513 – Managerial Economics
MGT 515 – Human Resources Management
Step 2: Audit Analysis
The next step in the TIG model is to rank order the three categories by creating
an audit matrix. First, rank each area with a score from one to five, with one
being hardest and five being the easiest to re-purpose. Then rank order all the
fives, then fours, and so on. For the last category that is not taught online or to
a limited degree, this might just be rank ordering the courses from the most online
to the least online courses. This portion of the Audit Analysis will discern what
content can be offered online quickly and without the commitment of significant
resources versus the content that would require time and resource commitment
before it could be re-purposed. Remember that the purpose of the TIG model
is to develop multiple revenue streams based upon the re-purposing of existing
online content. This does not negate the re-purposing of content that is not
available online for distance learning. It only recognizes that its use and potential
benefit must be weighed against the work necessary to bring it to market.
The second part of the Audit Analysis is the ranking of each category based upon
perceived marketability and its potential to develop as a revenue stream. This
is not to replace the formal market analysis that will be discussed later. This is
only done to discern what is available and what might be of value directly to the
consumer or to another institution or organization. Consider this as the time to
look for the breadth of market potential and not for the depth of market
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
260
Robinson
understanding — that will come later. An example of a partially completed
Content Audit Worksheet can be found in Figure 2.
Helpful hint: Remember that market potential in the TIG model is both
business-to-consumer and business-to-business. This is where the “out-of-thebox” thinking begins and it might be a good idea to involve several individuals in
this process. Applying the TIG model is not a sprint, but, rather, a long race
requiring time, patience and planning.
As the audit analysis begins to flesh out, it may become evident that there is some
content being taught that has high market potential, but limited initial re-purpose
potential. For example, a business school might have an online Master in
Business Administration (MBA) program that it could re-purpose (and should!),
but also has an onsite graduate class in Human Resource Management that is
taught somewhat online by an acknowledged expert in the field with a national
reputation. While the online M.B.A. program would be the easiest to use within
the TIG model, consideration should be given to transforming the Human
Resource Management course to an online format pending the faculty member’s
cooperation due to its market potential.
To summarize, the Audit Analysis provides the opportunity to identify easily
reusable content that may have market potential, as well as identifying not-soeasy-to-use content that should be considered for online use at a later date. It is
important to remember that this is the first and most general review — the indepth market stratification and market analysis will take place later. It is also
important to realize that some of the most valuable content may not be courses,
but other online content in the form of continuing education, undergraduate
courses, life long learning offerings, or review workshops.
Step 3: Market Stratification
Seldom is the content that is taught online via distance education, or any content
for that matter, only relevant to one specific discipline. Applying the TIG model
is about identifying how the content being taught is not only applicable within that
specific discipline, but how it also may be taught within other disciplines, as well
as being used in units other than the original one developed. In either instance,
the TIG model has potential to increase revenue based on business-to-consumer
(B2C) distribution, as well as business-to-business (B2B) distribution. While
both offer opportunities for increased revenue, they both also have several
considerations that should be carefully evaluated. These are discussed within the
Implementation Considerations portion of the TIG model.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Return on Investment for Distance Education Offerings
261
Figure 2. Content Audit Worksheet (5 = High Repurposability or
Marketability; 1 = Low Repurposability or Marketability)
Content Area
Re-purpose Potential
Market Potential
BAFI 513 – Investment and Portfolio Management
5
5
BUS 511 – International Business
5
4
MGT 525 – Current Issues in Health Care Mgmt.
5
2
MIS 501 – Decision Making Tools
3
4
MIS 523 – Data Base Systems
3
5
MKT 511 – Marketing Theory and Practice
2
5
BUS 515 – Business Law
1
3
ECN 513 – Managerial Economics
2
4
MGT 515 – Human Resources Management
2
5
Taught online via distance education
Taught online onsite
Limited online or not-online content
Business-to-Consumer
To provide a better understanding of the business-to-consumer aspect of the TIG
model, let’s look at the following example. Pharmacology is taught within a
variety of disciplines, including — but not limited to — pharmacy, medicine,
nursing, physician assistant programs and dentistry. While it is acknowledged
that each discipline teaches different variations or to different levels of complexity, the same content is still taught in the different disciplines and is an expense
that is borne by each providing program. What if it were possible to use a
pharmacology course developed for pharmacy students to teach students from
another health profession as well?
Consider the pharmacology course discussed above being taught to 75 pharmacy
students, but also being made available to 50 medical students as well. Since the
course was initially developed for pharmacy students, more than likely the
developmental costs have already been covered. This means that the additional
revenue generated is only being reduced by the incremental expenses necessary
to re-purpose the content and to deliver it to the end-user. This then produces
a greater return on investment for the re-purposed content than the first-run
content delivered to pharmacy students. Additionally, once the content has been
established online and enters into a recycle and refresh phase, the subsequent
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
262
Robinson
development costs drop even more, increasing the overall return on investment
due to an increased margin from the pharmacy school use. This is one example
of how content can be used within the TIG model.
Considering what to do with the content, as previously stated, requires out-ofthe-box thinking. Within the B2C stratification, a number of potential market
segments exist. Some stratified markets with examples include:
•
Credit course(s) within the same discipline: Enroll a larger number of
students within the same program or enroll students from other programs.
•
Credit course(s) within other disciplines: Enroll students from other
disciplines, as long as the course objectives are consistent for both
programs.
•
Continuing education within the same discipline: If a particular discipline has a continuing education requirement, then modify content and
enroll graduates. (Note: in some disciplines continuing education is a lossleader or a free giveaway product, especially to alumni.)
•
Continuing education within other disciplines: Take existing content,
modify it, and enroll learners from other disciplines. This has the allure of
specialty content, but the enrolling program should determine if specific
continuing education credentials are needed.
•
Certificate programming within the same discipline: If the practitioners
within a particular discipline can benefit from certificate programs, which
are longer than continuing education and require some mastery examination, then modify the content and enroll graduates. This type of offering
usually has a higher unit cost than continuing education, but must have some
value to the practitioner to induce enrollment.
•
Adult education or lifelong learning offerings: Provides the opportunity
to reach a very broad and diverse audience, which can be both good and
bad. This type of offering usually has a low unit cost to the consumer, so
it needs large enrollments. Could be niche-marketed to target only certain
groups (i.e., senior citizens, new mothers, etc.).
•
Course or content remediation within the same discipline: Provide the
content or course to students at other programs to allow them to remediate
a course that is not offered via summer school or at breaks at their
institution.
•
Review for certification or licensure examination within the same
discipline: Provide the content to individuals who are required to sit for a
certification, recertification, or licensure examination who feel they would
like a refresher course before taking the exam. This could be linked with
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Return on Investment for Distance Education Offerings
263
some form of a practice test as well, which would be part of the time to repurpose the materials.
The generic B2C list above is not exhaustive in that within each discipline there
are a variety of niche markets that could be identified by knowledgeable
individuals in that discipline. The key is to think creatively and to realize that until
proven otherwise, everyone is a potential consumer.
Helpful hint: Sit down with two or three colleagues and brainstorm the different
uses for the content within your discipline, as well as other disciplines or
subdisciplines that might offer the coursework that your institution has developed
for distance learners. Go online and search the course title or an indicator of the
content your institution has developed as yet another means of determining who
is teaching the same subject matter.
Business-to-Business
The second component of the market stratification mix is the business-tobusiness opportunities that might be available when considering the re-purposing
of content. Instead of offering the content directly to the learner, the program
offers the content to another entity who then conveys it to the end-user, thus
changing the role of the program and the face of the consumer.
Using the example of an online Master in Business Administration (M.B.A.)
program, the B2B application of the TIG model the program would be the
brokering the developed product to another college or university for subsequent
resale to the learner. In this example, the M.B.A. program could be sold in its
entirety or in its relevant parts. In either case, the contractual arrangement can
be structured to allow for either a lump-sum purchase of the content, an annual
contract, or a revenue-sharing arrangement where each party gets a set
percentage of the tuition generated. The merits of the three types of contractual
arrangements are discussed further in the Implementation section of the TIG
model.
Just like market stratification in the business-to-consumer model, the businessto-business model requires out-of-the-box thinking as well. A number of
potential market segments exist with some examples of stratified markets
including:
•
Entire program to be offered by another college or university: An
entire program of study, degree conferring, is contracted to another
institution for provision to the learner and conference of the degree. Sole
responsibility is provision of content and assessment.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
264
Robinson
•
Credit course(s) to be offered by another college or university:
Course(s) or content are contracted to another institution for use as deemed
necessary, ranging from required coursework to electives. Courses are
used as-is and the sole responsibility is for the provision of the content and
assessment.
•
Resource for credit course(s) to another college or university for
subsequent course development: Course(s) or content are contracted to
another institution for use in the development of courses ranging from
required coursework to electives. This would be a beneficial arrangement
for a college or university that is in program start-up or looking to improve
specific offerings. In this model, the contract will most likely be a onetime
arrangement and not a royalties-driven revenue model.
•
Centralized resource for another college or university: Course(s) or
content are contracted for use as a resource by another institution seeking
to bolster its supplemental learning resources. An example of this would
be contracting a course to an institution for use within the library by students
and even faculty.
•
Corporate education or training for in-house use: A partnership is
developed with an existing corporation for in-house use of the course(s) or
content for education or training. An example of this would be the provision
of a marketing course to a pharmaceutical drug company to help educate
sales representatives.
•
Corporate education or training for distributive learning: A partnership is developed with an existing corporation for the subsequent resale of
course(s) or content for education or training. An example of this would
be the provision of a marketing course to one company that used that
material to train the sales representatives for several different companies.
•
Adult education or lifelong learning offerings to be offered by another
college or university: Course(s) or content are contracted to another
institution for use to provide adult education materials that the contracting
institution is unwilling to provide.
•
Review for certification or licensure examination offered by a professional association: Course(s) or content are contracted to a local or
national professional association that subsequently sells a review for
individuals who are required to sit for a certification, recertification,
or licensure examination.
•
Continuing education or certificate program offered by a professional association: Course(s) or content are contracted to a local or
national professional association that subsequently sells it as continuing
education or certificate programs.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Return on Investment for Distance Education Offerings
265
The above generic list of B2B ideas is not exhaustive in that various disciplines
will have access to markets others do not. For instance, depending on the content
and purpose, the market for a school of business would differ from a school of
education. Again, the key is to think creatively and to realize that until proven
otherwise, every entity, albeit business or academic, is a potential consumer.
Helpful hint: Sit down with two or three colleagues, as well as individuals from
the corporate arena, to get their perspective on not only new markets, but the
types of offerings in which those markets might be interested. It never hurts to
go online and conduct another search, but in this case broaden the approach to
include more corporations and nonacademic entities.
Step 4: Analyzing the Market
When the brainstorming and entrepreneurial considerations have run their
course and several potential markets have been identified, it becomes necessary
to see which markets are worth pursuing. This is the time to go beyond the
breadth and look at the depth by sizing up the various markets to determine how
well the content and markets match up.
Analysis of the market can begin with reviewing the literature and conducting an
in-depth online search of the potential markets and the competition. One way to
gauge market interest and to assess the competition is to analyze the offerings
and strategic alliances of the competition. This can help determine the extent to
which the market is saturated and generate ideas for potential alliances that can
be capitalized upon. Other ways in which the market can be analyzed will depend
upon whether the model is business-to-consumer or business-to-business.
Within the business-to-consumer model, it may be possible to assess the market
by evaluating the specific market strata to discern if there is any information
about patronage patterns, how much these individuals pay for various types of
services, the nature and cost of the competition, the quality of the competition’s
offering, the depth of the market, any geographically underserved areas, and the
level of commitment present within the market (i.e., translating inquiry to action).
A good example of a market analysis of the B2C model is one that we conducted
at Shenandoah University School of Pharmacy to evaluate the market for a
nontraditional Doctor of Pharmacy program. A survey was mailed to a sample
of pharmacists in a four-state area (Virginia, Maryland, Pennsylvania and West
Virginia) to identify if there was interest in a nontraditional program, as well as
certificate programming. The results indicated that a significant number of
respondents were interested in pursuing either advanced certification or a
nontraditional Doctor of Pharmacy degree within the next two years. The
market was also analyzed by evaluating the marketplace by researching the
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
266
Robinson
existing nontraditional Doctor of Pharmacy programs to determine the strengths
and weaknesses of each program, as well as how many would be direct online
competitors. The marketplace contained a number of nontraditional programs,
but only two were online. Most were regional onsite programs and the majority
were more traditional than nontraditional. This not only helped determine the
feasibility of entering the market, but also allowed us to accentuate the strengths
of our program when marketing it.
Market analysis within a B2B model may be a bit different in that the market
analysis may focus more on the potential market than on the competition, given
that there may not be any competition. Once again, I will draw upon a personal
example for this section. After the nontraditional Doctor of Pharmacy program
was implemented, the marketplace within pharmacy education was evaluated.
It was determined that there were colleges of pharmacy that would have liked
to support their alumni with a nontraditional program, but lacked the resources
or expertise to do so. Once interest was identified, a sponsored luncheon was
hosted at a national pharmacy meeting to which the deans from all 81 schools of
pharmacy were invited. Roughly 20 administrators attended the luncheon, which
was a presentation and discussion on collaborative opportunities in pharmacy
education. The luncheon resulted in several potential collaborative ventures that
did not directly result in a contract, but still hold some potential. Subsequently,
one collaborative contract was developed to provide a nontraditional program for
another school of pharmacy for only their alumni and pharmacists proximal to the
program. When the contract is enacted it will generate roughly $250,000 in
revenue annually for nothing more than providing the content to another program.
In this instance, the market analysis was a combination of a number of factors,
such as the number of pharmacists seeking a nontraditional degree, the number
of programs seeking to satisfy their alumni constituency, and the loyalty of
pharmacy graduates to the original institutions. The motivating factor to initiate
a B2B contract was that a direct-to-consumer program has a limit on the number
of students that could be supported, but offering the content through another
college or university required less resources and had the potential to generate
additional revenue. The re-purposing described above is but one example of how
the TIG model could be successfully applied.
Step 5: Implementation Considerations
In many instances, the development of the educational content for use can almost
be easier than the administration, coordination, and oversight that may be
required to implement the TIG model. It would work best if one or two individuals
facilitated the process, tracked the various offerings and assisted in the communications with the various institutional entities that will be involved (business
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Return on Investment for Distance Education Offerings
267
office, registrar, admissions, financial aid, library, bookstore, etc.). This could be
a portion of an individual’s responsibilities and someone within the administration
would work best. The amount of time this takes will be directly related to how
successful each venture is and their collective contributions. Care should be
taken to ensure that the potential benefits from the TIG model outweigh the time
and effort needed to repackage, re-market, and redistribute the materials. For
example, it is easy to say that many courses being offered within a college or
university can be converted into continuing education. As previously mentioned,
continuing education within many disciplines is considered a loss-leader, in that
there is a minimal charge or it is given away for free. So in this instance, there
may be no revenue or limited direct revenue generated by the continuing
education offerings. This is not to say that it might not generate indirect revenue
from alumni, but that would be harder to measure. Regardless of whether it is
business-to-business or business-to-consumer, some part of the institution’s
support services will be involved.
It is critical to the success of the venture that during the implementation an effort
is made to ensure that everyone is on the same page once the re-purposed
content is ready for use. Remember that the consumer could be a learner, a
company or organization, or another institution of higher education, and in each
case the procurement and entry process must be as seamless as possible, with
as little confusion as possible. The necessity of the need for seamlessness is
because the definition of quality has shifted in the past 10 to 15 years and has
decreased as quality has become increasingly linked to service as well as
content. The final reason to get everyone on the same page is that the first time
you apply the TIG model the process will be new to your institution, but the result
may be new to the buyer as well. So fear of the unknown could exist throughout
the entire transaction.
Helpful Hint: During Market Stratification, set aside time to meet with the
ancillary services that will be involved in order to develop an understanding of
what to do, whose responsibility it is, and how to best facilitate the transfer of
information and communication. Some things can be handled via e-mail, but this
is not one of them. Nothing beats a face-to-face meeting to make sure everyone
is on the same page and working towards a common goal. The key is to do this
far enough in advance to allow everyone to ramp up for the new product rollout.
Business-to-Consumer Considerations
Every entrepreneurial venture has its share of challenges or considerations.
When applying the TIG model there are several areas that should be examined
before moving forward. The B2C portion of the TIG model is learner-related and
in the event that the content in question is a credit course, then it will require the
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
268
Robinson
involvement of a variety of ancillary services, such as the registrar, admissions,
financial aid, and library. This area should be addressed in light of potential
accreditation issues associated with the provision of online distance education.
If the content is continuing education or lifelong learning related, then certainly
the business office and possibly the admissions office may be involved, as well
as any academic units that provide these types of offerings, like a college of
lifelong learning or extended education.
In order to maximize your return on investment using the TIG model for the
content developed, it becomes necessary to move the potential student past the
interest stage to the commitment stage, which is when financial commitment
takes place. For example, when re-purposing the online M.B.A. program
discussed earlier, it might be more appealing, both financially and psychologically, for a potential student to enroll in courses that cost less or take less time
but could be counted as credit towards a degree. Unfortunately, longer offerings
can also present a barrier to a potential student before enrollment even occurs.
This is an opportunity that is lost in that an exposure on some level could translate
into the potential student enrolling in one or more courses or even in a degree
program. Remember, the TIG model is about maximizing the return on
investment by translating online content into opportunities, driving down unit
production costs while increasing revenue. The determination of the types of
offerings that are developed should be based upon the results of the Market
Analysis, which was discussed earlier in the chapter.
Another means of maximizing a return investment may be providing students
with multiple points of entry into the program. Using the TIG model is about
capitalizing on the potential of a given product, so the biggest change may be in
the deployment of the content, as opposed to a larger re-purposing of the content.
For example, instead of having a degree program with a once-a-year admission,
students could be allowed to enter the program at more times throughout the year
to decrease the program start date as a potential barrier to enrollment. How this
is structured will be dependent on the type of distance learning offerings. For
example, asynchronous distance learning courses can be provided much easier
and more frequently than synchronous distance learning courses that require
more direct and structured faculty time.
Business-to-Business Considerations
Within the B2B part of the TIG model, there are once again considerations to be
discussed before venturing forth. For example, copyright clearance it is no
longer a question of fair use, but the knowledgeable sale of educational content
containing copyrighted materials. In order to sell the content to another college
or university, the appropriate level of copyright release must be ensured. Since
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Return on Investment for Distance Education Offerings
269
the cost to obtain copyright permission can vary, a nominal amount should be
placed in the budget to ensure some degree of financial accountability so that
copyright expenses do not become an “unplanned expense.” Another concern
is that of intellectual property and ownership. The university selling the courses
to other programs for distribution may need to compensate faculty or ensure that
course ownership has been resolved before this occurs. This should be
thoroughly researched both within faculty policies and then outside the college
or university to see what other alternatives exist.
The purchasing institution should ensure that the faculty are comfortable with the
courses purchased and that these courses meet the accreditation standards for
that institution, albeit specialized or regional. This can be resolved by providing
the purchasing college or university with a copy of the material for review, the
recommendation that the materials be reviewed by faculty in that area of study
or by the curriculum committee, and that the contracting institution contact any
relevant accrediting groups to understand the ramifications of purchasing
content for reuse. Finally, the content needs to be stripped of identifiers as much
as possible to ensure that the content does not reflect the college or university
of origination, but is more representative of the purchasing institution.
As discussed earlier, there are three primary ways to structure the contract
regarding the sale of content to another institution. The first contract model, a
lump sum payment, would work best when content is sold for onetime use and
does not have the potential to be a renewable means of revenue generation. An
example of this is when an institution brokers a course to another institution for
onetime use to help get a course started. The second contract model, the
annually renewable contract, works well when the brokering institution provides
content that is used as a resource that has to be updated at least once per year.
One example of this is when a college or university purchases a self-study course
for statistics from another school and places the course on reserve in the library
for students to use as a resource. The final contract model, the royalty
arrangement, is where the purchasing institution pays a fixed percent of the
revenue to the brokering institution. Whenever it appears that learners, whether
they are students in college, continuing education, corporate training or any other
arrangement whereby individuals will enroll for a period of time, the royalty
arrangement may be the best alternative.
For example, the college or university brokering the content could negotiate a
split of 45% of all revenue for the brokering institution and 55% for the
contracting institution. The reason the imbalanced split is that the brokering
institution is only providing the content while the contracting institution is
responsible for the marketing, admissions, registration, and other functions that
must occur when a student enters a program of study. The brokering institution
should set guidelines to ensure that the revenue is sufficient to generate a profit
and can be worded to state something like, “the contracting institution will be
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
270
Robinson
awarded 45% of all revenue generated from tuition charged in the delivery of
XYZ MBA program. Tuition costs should not fall below $XXX per hour and the
percentage will be awarded based upon the highest tuitional cost during a given
semester.” The reason for only stating the minimal charge is that the brokering
institution stands to gain more as the tuition is raised and the contract does not
have to be rewritten each time. A list of the different types of offerings and some
possible contract arrangement ideas can be found in Table 1.
Entrepreneurial Considerations during Implementation
Being entrepreneurial is about capitalizing on the strength or expertise of an
organization and leveraging that to some gain. The gain usually is financial,
although other types of gains exist, as well. In this way it is possible to see that
the TIG model and entrepreneurship are very much interrelated. It is not possible
to implement the TIG model without being entrepreneurial.
The only way to act upon entrepreneurial ideas and to maximize return on
investment is to foster a culture of risk willingness, as opposed to risk aversion.
This is not an endorsement of recklessness, but, instead, a charge to be
aggressive where warranted and to use speed to market as a competitive
advantage. The best of intentions does not move the process any faster, but it
can cause an organization to miss a unique opportunity. A key to success is to
act quickly and decisively in that an open market today may be highly competitive
tomorrow.
Some considerations regarding being entrepreneurial relate well to the TIG, such
as:
•
•
Take chances when warranted and do not be risk averse
Know the market before you act
Table 1. Considerations for Contract Arrangements in Various B2B Models
Type of Offering
Royalty Agreement
Entire program offered by another college or university
Credit course(s) offered by another college or university
Resource for credit course(s) to another college or
university for subsequent course development
Resource for another college or university
Corporate education or training for in-house use
Corporate education or training for distributive learning
Adult education or life long learning offerings offered by
another college or university
Review for certification or licensure examination offered
by a professional association
Continuing education or certificate program offered by a
professional association
X
X
Renewable
Contract
One-time
sale
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Return on Investment for Distance Education Offerings
271
•
•
•
•
Plan first, act second, but definitely act
•
•
Think outside of the box and be creative
•
Realize that there are nonfinancial gains to entrepreneurial activities
(Robinson, 2002)
Be prudent, practical, and use common sense
Measure gains versus predetermined projections
Utilize existing online resources for another purpose to minimize the work
involved
Keep a portion of the revenue where the initiative began to generate future
entrepreneurial spirit
The best of entrepreneurial intentions will amount to very little if there is no
discussion about what has to be done. The plain and simple truth is that work
without marketing is like no work at all.
Step 6: Marketing the Program
For some reason academia has been prone to the “if you build it, they will come”
rationale of marketing various programs. It is not that no marketing takes place,
only that sometimes it is more of an afterthought than a carefully developed
strategy. Whether the marketing is for the business-to-consumer or businessto-business component of the TIG model, marketing should be considered as
repeated exposures through various media overtime. One exposure seldom, if
ever, will result in revenue, but a focused and planned approach to generating
interest will.
The main point is that the marketing should be clear, concise, professional, and
targeted for the maximum effect at the lowest possible cost. It would be easy
to develop an effective marketing plan if an unlimited supply of money were
available. The challenge lies in developing an effective marketing plan with
limited resources. For example, advertisements to promote a business-toconsumer product should be developed and targeted to a specific audience so
anyone seeing it (hearing it) would know what it means and how to proceed. You
don’t market to pharmacists in Time Magazine, but you would in the Journal of
the American Pharmaceutical Association.
A wealth of information exists on marketing regarding academia and specific to
e-learning that facilitates the author’s recommendation that external resources
be sought if onsite expertise is not available. Consider talking with the personnel
from admissions and public relations to assist in the development of a marketing
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
272
Robinson
strategy. The only recommendations that the author has on this potentially
detailed and complicated subject is to keep it simple, to test developed marketing
materials on the potential audience before releasing them en masse, to be
persistent, and to fight the frustrations that are prone to happen if results are not
realized reasonably quickly.
Some insights from personal experience when trying to market a new online
program may be instructive. For the first two years of the program, I used the
“five and five” rule, which meant that I tried to get five minutes with any group
of five or more people who were either potential consumers of my product or
possible partners in the future. In addition, depending on the nature of the
product, it may be possible to develop a marketing strategy that could be viewed
as concentric circles so the institution markets a program locally, regionally,
statewide, and finally nationally (or internationally) in an organized manner using
various media.
An example of one marketing strategy comes from when the School of
Pharmacy was promoting the new nontraditional Doctor of Pharmacy program
for Shenandoah University. I introduced continuing education speakers throughout the four-state area and handed out program information at the same time.
The University sponsored booths at the various state pharmacy association
annual meetings, which were always followed within two months with a full-page
advertisement in the state association journal for pharmacists. A key factor to
help make all this possible is that local associations charge less per square foot
for booth space than national associations and that state journals charge less for
advertisements than do national journals. To reinforce the message, state mailing
lists were obtained for the pharmacists in the four-state area and mailings were
sent out either several months before or after the state meetings, just to keep the
program and the University in front of any potential consumer. The exposure
was more focused, but was also more intense. Since the program was just getting
started, it was helpful to start in a four state market and then go to a national
audience, which is now achieved by running advertisements once to twice
annually to pharmacists throughout the state. Additionally, brief articles were
written and submitted to various state association journals to explain the program
or to update readers about the program and its online attributes in order to provide
the potential student with yet another way to learn about the program. A nice
feature of these types of articles is that they are free. An article also presents
a different impression than an advertisement does, because an article in an
association’s journal seems to have more legitimacy. Finally, and most important
of all, our web site has been modified on numerous occasions to ensure that it
provides a good look, is easy to navigate, and has up-to-date information
regarding all of our programs.
The types of marketing materials that should be developed depend on the type
of market being entered. The marketing for a business-to-consumer market is
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Return on Investment for Distance Education Offerings
273
different from a business-to-business market. The former is mass marketing and
the latter is more focused and personalized. Be careful not to overdo the
development of marketing materials with too much text, but be even more careful
not to fall into the trap of not getting the word out.
Helpful Hint: Review the marketing materials of the competition to get an idea
of what you like, what is being done within the potential marketplace, and how
you can differentiate your offerings. Gathering these materials can be done by
a variety of means, including, but not limited to: visiting a web site, collecting
mailings or advertisements, or getting placed on a mailing list. Also, seek the
expertise available to you on campus and do not attempt to go it alone in terms
of developing a marketing plan, marketing materials, or even so far as to request
funding to assist in the initial marketing of something new.
Limitations to Transformative Income
Generation
Every idea is prone to having limitations. Within the TIG model, administrative
support must be present from the top and allow the academic units or programs
the opportunity to make the determinations on what will work. It is only practical
that the individual programs, whose personnel are the content experts and
understand the potential markets, be able to make the decisions about what can
and cannot work. It would be possible to conduct the Internal Audit at the
university level, but it could have a profoundly negative impact if the faculty,
staff, and administration within each program perceive the intent is to generate
revenue from their efforts without their knowledge and with no potential benefit.
Keeping empowerment at the local level also helps mediate the next potential
limitation, which is what happens to the revenue once it is generated?
It is important to remember that a portion of the revenue stays “local” as an
incentive to the individuals who do the work. Leaving behind only a token reward
will de-motivate the faculty and staff involved. As word gets out, it also will have
a negative impact on anyone with anything to offer. This local incentive does not
have to be elaborate and would best be served by doing something that benefits
those doing the work, as well as the entire academic unit. For example, when
the school of business generates revenue selling its content to another university,
then the local incentives could be some new hardware for the individuals doing
the content re-purposing and then additional funds for research seed money.
This is not a lot of money, but spending a few thousand dollars could help establish
buy-in and increase the number of opportunities that can be capitalized upon by
fostering a culture of innovation and entrepreneurship. If there is the chance that
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
274
Robinson
university overhead costs, as well as other administrative expenses, minimize the
amount of funds that are available to the initiating academic unit so it only benefits
the university and not the program, then it may be best not to be entrepreneurial.
Doing the work and seeing nothing for it will be de-motivating, as well as also
creating more financial problems in the long run if the funds generated are
considered just another part of the revenue stream and no additional resources
are provided and no incentives are forthcoming.
It is imperative that everyone involved realize that applying and benefiting from
the TIG model will take time. The worst thing that could happen would be to start
the process and not give it enough time to work out. It will take time to re-purpose
the content, to develop the new markets and to get the process streamlined and
efficient. This is not an overnight process. Care should be taken on the frontend to ensure that everyone involved is aware of this. How long the process
takes before it starts to produce results will be dependent upon the flexibility of
the institution and of the personnel involved.
The increase in return on investment via the TIG model or any other means
should be considered very carefully when applying it to a university budget. The
funds generated are soft money, and even if they are the result of a contract, no
contract is indefinite and any personnel hired as a result of the contract will need
to be supported by other means when the contract expires. Care should be taken
to minimize the “fixed” expenses that accompany the new revenue stream by
out-sourcing work whenever possible, by supplementing the need for additional
staff with better equipment to facilitate the process. For example, if the new
facet of revenue is providing content, some of which is on CD-ROM, then the
budget for the project should include out-sourced CD-ROM replication or funds
for the purchase of a CD-ROM replicator and labeler that can meet the demands
of the additional contract, as well as help support onsite activities. It should be
clearly understood that it takes money to make money and that the TIG model
is not a “something-from-nothing” process.
The idea that it takes money to make money is interesting. It should be made clear
that not all types of distance education translate equally within the TIG model.
Some means of distance education have more personnel costs than others, which
would decrease the margin on the product no matter how many times the content
was offered. An example of this is the difference in return on investment that
could occur when re-purposing synchronous offerings versus asynchronous
offerings. For synchronous offerings, even though the development and
associated infrastructure costs may be covered or marginalized over time, the
personnel costs are present each time the content is re-purposed, which
decreases the margin for that particular offering. Now compare this to the repurposing of asynchronous content, for which the development and associated
costs are covered and the more it is used, the better the margin and the better
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Return on Investment for Distance Education Offerings
275
the return on investment. A key consideration for the TIG model is that online
offerings that have larger or repetitive costs should be carefully considered
before committing to re-purposing the content.
The final limitation to the TIG model is the marketing that takes place once the
opportunities have been identified. It is one thing to identify a potential market.
It is something very different to translate that into a contract and subsequent
revenue. Commitment and support for the marketing of the re-purposed products
must be present for success to result. Once again, the foe to success is going
to be not allowing enough time to get the results that are being sought.
Remember, marketing is repeated exposure through various media over time. It
is possible to get a contract prior to development within the business-to-business
model, but that might not work every time in that the content may exist in a form
requiring some degree of change, making it difficult to finalize a contract. The
key to success is to spend the time talking about the products that have or will
be developed and allow time for the word to get out.
Conclusion
The TIG model is a means of generating additional revenue by leveraging existing
assets, which within higher education is educational content. The ability of an
institution to apply the TIG model will be situational. While some institutions
might be able to apply it on a large scale, others may find it works best when
applied to a small segment of the curriculum. Instead of applying the TIG model
to the entire business school, an administration might consider how to apply it to
just three courses in marketing or management. There is nothing wrong with
taking the three best offerings available, or even just one, and re-purposing that
to help the financial situation of an institution.
Also remember that applying parts of the TIG model will work to your benefit,
as well — just work within your means and keep the ideas and plans small and
manageable. For example, an institution or program that only conducted the
Internal Audit and Audit Analysis and did not go any further could share those
results with the faculty to demonstrate what is online and its potential for the
purpose of motivating the faculty and channeling them to focus on developing
courses online, both onsite and at a distance. While there would be no direct
increase in revenue due to content re-purposing, consider the impact this could
have on other revenue streams like student tuition. A program that improves the
uses of technology may be able to leverage that within its recruitment of onsite
or resident students and maintain, or even increase, the applicant pool. Additionally, the results of the Internal Audit and Audit Analysis could be used to help
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
276
Robinson
focus resources on either successful areas or areas needing improvement,
depending on the institution’s strategic plan. Regardless of whether the entire
model is applied or portions are, hopefully the institution can realize some
financial gain, whether direct or indirect.
These financially turbulent times in higher education are not going to go away any
time soon. Colleges and universities should seek to secure their financial
positions as best they can by utilizing resources available to them and combining
efficiencies of content delivery with quality educational offerings. To make this
re-purposing work, it must be cost effective and institutions should be cognizant
of the high cost to provide technology mediated education and develop ways to
maximize the return on investment for what is a highly costly undertaking.
Taking a chance is only a risk if no forethought is given. With planning, open
communication, and a willingness to venture into the unknown, the TIG model
can be successfully implemented.
References
Council for Higher Education Accreditation. (2002). Accreditation and Assuring Quality in Distance Learning, Washington, D.C.
Fingar, P., Kumar H. and Sharma, T. (2000). Enterprise E-Commerce. Tampa,
FL: Meghan-Kiffer Press.
Hartman, A., Sifonis, J. and Kador, J. (2000). Net Ready: Strategies for
Success in the E-conomy. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Morgan, B. M. (2001). Calculating the cost of online courses. Business Officer,
25(4), 22-27.
Morgan, B. M. (2001). Is distance learning worth it? Helping to determine
the costs of online courses. Retrieved from the World Wide Web: http:/
/webpages.marshall.edu/~morgan16/onlinecosts/.
Peloquin-Dodd, M. and Stern, J. (2002). Weak Equity Markets Hurt U.S. Higher
Education Endowments. Standards & Poors, Reprint from Ratings Direct,
November 26. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Robinson, E. T. (2001, Fall). Maximizing the return on investment for distance
education offerings. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 4(2). Retrieved from the World Wide Web: http://www.westga.edu/
~distance/jmain11.html.
Robinson, E. T. (2002). A new lesson for eLearning programs: “e” is for
entrepreneurship. Syllabus, 16(4), 24-25.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Return on Investment for Distance Education Offerings
277
Taylor, D. and Terhune, A. D. (2001). Doing E-Business: Strategies for
Thriving in an Electronic Marketplace. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Western Cooperative for Educational Telecommunications. (2001). Technology Costing Methodology Handbook – Version 1.0. Boulder, CO:
Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education. Retrieved from the
World Wide Web: http://www.wiche.edu/telecom/Projects/tcm/index.htm.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
278 Levy and Ramim
Chapter XIV
Financing Expensive
Technologies in an Era
of Decreased Funding:
Think Big ... Start
Small ... and Build Fast
Yair Levy
Florida International University, USA
Michelle M. Ramim
MIS Consultant, USA
Abstract
The great Greek philosopher Aristotle noted that learning is the outcome of
teaching and practice. Clearly, learning is not confined to classroom
lectures exclusively. In the past several decades, educators explored the
possibilities of providing learning experiences to remote students. With the
improvements in technology and the growing popularity of Internet use,
online learning caught the attention of both corporations and educational
institutions. In this chapter, we will discuss the two common approaches
higher education institutions pursue when implementing online learning
programs and provide the rationale for their success or failure. Following,
we will define, propose, and categorize a set of eight key elements of a
successful online learning program implementation in an era of decreased
funding. The following chapter also contains a case study about the
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Financing Expensive Technologies in an Era of Decreased Funding
279
development of a successful, self-funding, online learning program in the
college of business administration at a state university in the Southeast US,
followed by a summary and discussion.
Introduction
Traditional learning methodology began transforming when elite universities
embraced online education in their degree programs (Forelle, 2003). Progress in
distance and online education has increased its popularity in the past decade
(Levy and Murphy, 2002). Consequently, it is carving a new brand of universities
and causing traditional schools to rethink their business model. Furthermore,
some elite schools have developed specialized online degree and certificate
programs. In doing so, these schools strive to compete within this new learning
methodology and create a new source of revenue, especially due to the declining
enrollment and funding resulting from the September 11, 2001 terrorist attack
(Roueche et al., 2002).
It is a great challenge to implement a self-funding online learning program, where
large seed capital is required to finance such expensive technologies. It is even
more challenging to do so in an era of decreased funding, when most schools lack
for capital in the first place. The approach taken in this chapter will provide
institutions with an understanding of key strategies for a successful, self-funding,
online learning program.
The success and survival of a self-funding, online program depends heavily on
collaborative efforts to drive the planning and the execution of such challenging
initiatives. Starting with a conservative ideology, with a few courses and rapidly
advancing to a fully developed degree program is imperative for long-term
success. Continuous development of new courses will ensure a steady increase
in the volume of students over time. Such an increase is fundamental to
generating more funding, which, in turn, should be channeled back into the
initiative as an essential element for the continuous growth of the program and
its ultimate success.
Background
In the past few decades, universities and colleges have faced a growing demand
to attract qualified business students. At the same time, however, universities
and colleges are faced with the increase demand by local communities and
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
280 Levy and Ramim
governments to provide more scholarships and financial aid for local resident and
citizen students, in spite of the reduction in financial support allocated to the
academic institutions. As a result, higher education administrators have been
seeking to increase their overall revenues from corporate sponsors and investors
by crafting specialized degree and certificate programs. Not surprisingly,
universities and colleges have been relying on international students to compensate by admitting a large number of full-fee paying foreign students (Surek,
2000). Since this has become such an important revenue stream, many business
schools have gone beyond designing attractive specialized programs for international students and have even collaborated with international universities around
the world to create joint programs. The Wall Street Journal reports that in the
year 2001 alone, international students accounted for more than $11 billion for
tuition and living expenses in the US, most of which came from abroad (Golden,
2002). Other developed countries experience similar economic benefits from
international students. For example, Australia was reported to have gained about
four to five billion dollars per year from international students attending higher
educational institutions there (Surek, 2000). It was also reported that in the
academic year of 2000-2001, the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS)
database contained 547,000 foreign students in the US (Davis and Oster, 2002).
The same source reported that the percentage of undergraduate international
students in US community colleges increased from 25% in 1996 to more than
36% in 2001 (Davis and Oster, 2002).
In the post-September 11, 2001, era, since some of the hijackers came to the US
on student visas, new tougher INS regulations were installed to control and
evaluate the issuing of student visas. The New York Times suggested that these
new regulations would dramatically affect the amount of future international
students seeking a US education (Schemo, 2002). That impact is a result of the
decrease in overall student visas issued by the INS and the sluggish pace of
processing new student visa seekers. The same source also reported that some
current international students, who were already in the US, were forced to return
to their home country and reapply for student visas under the new regulations.
Doing so delayed them for months in their foreign countries while waiting for
permission to come back to the US (Schemo, 2002). At the same time,
universities outside the US are seeking global recognition from US accreditation
bodies and competing to attract such international students. In 2000, AACSB, an
accreditation association for business schools, changed its name from “American Association of Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB)” to “Association
to the Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) International,” to
symbolize the shift from an American accreditation body to a more international
and global-oriented accreditation body. In 2002, 31 institutions, or more than 7%,
out of 430 AACSB accredited business schools were international schools.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Financing Expensive Technologies in an Era of Decreased Funding
281
Twenty percent of the top 50 M.B.A. programs ranked by the Wall Street
Journal (Alsop, 2002) were international business schools, including five
European, two Mexican and two Canadian business schools. The Financial
Times also ranked 15 non-US, international business schools in their top 50
executive M.B.A. programs in a 2002 survey. With the increase of global
recognition and accreditation of international institutions, augmented by the
student visa limitations and the fear of terrorism in the US, an increasing number
of students are expected to seek higher education in their home countries.
No one should underestimate the impact of international students on the economy
in developed countries such as the US, UK, Canada or Australia, to name just
a few. With the student visa limitations and the increased global recognition of
international educational institutions, the decrease in funding has become a
funding predicament in several US colleges and universities. The New York
Times reported that commuter students from Canada and Mexico studying in
nearby US colleges and universities are banned from entering the US due to the
new regulations (Hakim, 2002). These students are not qualified for student
visas, as most are not attending American schools full-time. At the same time,
they are not meeting the criteria to qualify for tourist visas, either. As a result,
some US schools are faced with a substantial loss of tuition, reaching a state of
financial crisis.
In the past few years Information and Communication Technologies (ICT), such
as online learning, grabbed the attention of many higher education administrators
(Levy and Murphy, 2002). In the late 1980s Canadian schools invested an
enormous amount of time and resources to develop learning programs for a
distance delivery. US schools quickly followed them with some top business
schools, like Duke and Michigan, implementing online learning programs in the
1990s. As the use of the Internet increased during the second half of the 1990s,
many other US universities headed by their business and engineering schools
implemented online learning programs. Almost all included one version or
another of an M.B.A. program (Davids-Landau, 2000). In 2000, nearly 25
business schools accredited by the AACSB provided M.B.A. programs entirely
online (Arbaugh, 2000a).
Today, more than ever, higher education administrators are very much interested
in online learning programs. As they face declining student enrollments, an aging
student population, and reduced level of federal, state, and local funding, this has
resulted in a growing number of institutions looking for new and innovative ways,
mainly by the use of ICT, to attract students in remote or distant locations,
including international students (Alavi and Leidner, 2001).
There are two major perspectives about the implementation of online learning
programs. The first one is a partnership between higher educational institutions
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
282 Levy and Ramim
and media or Internet development companies. Several institutions assumed this
partnership would be as a successful venture. This assumption was mainly due
to the rush most educational institutions and administrators were under to
increase enrollment and generate additional funding instantly. In the past half
decade, some universities that partnered with private media companies have
failed in this type of partnership (Hafner, 2002). Some examples include: New
York University that closed NYUonline, the University of Maryland that closed
its profit-based online arm in October 2001, and Temple University’s Virtual
Temple, closed in summer 2001 (Hafner, 2002). Perhaps this type of partnership
is difficult to maintain as each entity has its own agenda: the media companies
want to increase profits, while higher education institutions first and foremost
want to improve (or maintain) their competitive edge and deliver education at a
time of plunging state and government funding. AACSB criticized such partnerships, maintaining they can jeopardize the quality, integrity, and significance of
the education provided (AACSB, 2002b).
The second perspective about the implementation of online learning programs
avoids partnership pitfalls by pursuing in-house capabilities when implementing
such projects. Some higher educational institutions find it more appropriate to
start a small, in-house, pilot program without commitment to outside media or
Internet development companies. The major thrust behind such programs is the
“think big, start small, and build fast” approach to eventually offer more robust
online learning programs without for-profit partners.
In-house implementation of an online learning program can be challenging,
particularly with regard to issues of: administration and institutional support,
professional development team, implementation plan, budget and funding, quality
assessment and assurance, policies and procedures. Nonetheless, many benefits
can result from such an avenue. First, the ability to generate new funding sources
by attracting international students who do not need student visas and without the
added living expense. Second, the ability to attract students remotely without
revenue sharing or a major unexpected hike in peripheral program costs. Third,
allowing greater academic control and quality assurance of programs without the
pressure for specific, corporate-type profits.
The next section of this chapter will concentrate on some solutions to alleviate
the funding crises by implementing in-house online learning programs to attract
international and remote students to fee-base programs. A roadmap is presented
with some key elements for a successful implementation, followed by a case
study demonstrating the effectiveness of such a plan for the College of Business
Administration in a state university in the southeastern US.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Financing Expensive Technologies in an Era of Decreased Funding
283
Key Elements for a Successful, SelfFunding, Online Learning Program
Overview
Like any implementation of information systems, not all are successful or
sustaining the point of self-funding. In order to achieve a successful stage of a
self-funding online learning program, some investment both in time and capital
is essential prior to implementation. It is the assumption of the authors that a
successful implementation is a ticket for a self-funding program. Furthermore,
in order to avoid online learning implementation failures, it is vital to combine all
key elements based on successful cases. This section will present the key
elements for successful implementation and a roadmap that can help institutions
develop self-funding, online learning programs. It includes justifications for the
importance of each key piece for the overall success of the project (see Figure
1). As presented above, the pressure to implement such technologies and
programs is growing, especially as a result of the homeland security changes
made in the post-September 11, 2001 era. The temptation to quickly implement
and offer many online learning courses is undoubtedly present. But in the long
run, it is far better to invest time in planning, building administrative and
institutional support, as well as evaluating current available platforms. Only then
is it recommended to initiate a small-scale implementation pilot. After gaining
sufficient experience, establishing a good reputation from faculty and students,
along with providing high quality support and development, a major push can be
made to build and extend the program to offer more courses and form degree
programs online.
In the following sections, we will provide a roadmap to a successful implementation of self-funding, online learning programs, including a comprehensive
review of the eight key elements of such an endeavor, beginning with a strategic
plan and concluding with quality assurance. Each element is discussed in detail
followed by a case study demonstrating the process as it was implemented in a
state university in the southeastern US.
Strategic Plan
It is a vital step in any project to take adequate time for proper planning. Without
proper planning and adequate time invested in the development of a roadmap, a
costly failure can emerge. A good strategic plan should encompass an analysis
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
284 Levy and Ramim
Figure 1. Eight Key Elements for a Self-Funding Online Learning Program
of all the elements presented in this chapter, along with the development of a
blueprint, or a strategic plan, of the implementation process. Such a plan can also
include foreseeable problems and some suggested solutions or avenues of finding
solutions to such challenges. It is recommended to propose a plan that is built on
a gradual development process, rather than implementing a full-fledged program
without proper acceptance by the faculty, students and administrators. With this
perspective in mind and the reality of the emerging need for online learning
programs and degrees, it is recommended to adopt the “think big, start small, and
build fast” methodology. This methodology will allow institutions to progress with
their project one step at a time, building and improving based on feedback and
constructive comments from users, faculty and administrators. At the same time,
the development of a strategic plan for such methodology will provide a solid plan
for scalability and funding success.
A thorough assessment is needed for the development of a strategic plan. Such
assessment may include: potential sources of funding, potential institutional
support, potential students, potential employees, potential faculty, infrastructure
(including hardware and software solutions), and the desired timeframe of the
project.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Financing Expensive Technologies in an Era of Decreased Funding
285
Administrative and Institutional Support
Administrative and institutional support is a crucial piece of a successful
implementation in the pursuit of a self-funding program. It is important to
emphasize to administrators the potential benefits associated with such programs
and, at the same time, sincerely present the challenges foreseen in such projects.
The lack of education on the benefits and limitation of such technologies may
cause some misconceptions about such projects, resulting in roadblocks for a
successful implementation.
A major impediment of any online learning program is the lack of initial support
from the institution’s administration, stemming mainly from misconceptions. It is
crucial that department chairpersons, college deans, university provosts or
chancellors, as well as university presidents, fully understand the key benefits
and challenges of such programs for their competitive advantage.
Many institutions that seek to provide online learning programs invest tremendous efforts in the development of online learning courses, faculty training, and
equipment, but lack the overall united institutional support for online learning
students. Institutional support for online learning students constitutes all the
benefits students enjoy when they are on-campus, but in a format that is available
via the Internet or the Web, beyond the access to their online learning courses
and interactions with the professor. Such support activities or benefits include
online access to: registration, financial aid, the library, the bookstore, advisors,
student organizations and virtual communities. In many institutions, most of these
support functions are already available and need integration to a single portal
enabling students to have access to a centralized point of entry. Such a
centralized point of entry, or portal, can be created via the online learning
platform where links to the institutional support functions are provided, along
with links to the online courses. In the event that some of the institutional
functions are not available, it is recommended to investigate and define how such
functions can be developed, if possible, during the pilot testing period. As most
online learning initiatives begin by attracting mostly current or local students, it
is possible to start the pilot program without some of these functions, but maintain
a plan to add such features in the near future. In the event an institution is seeking
to attract remote, out-of-state, or out-of-country students, it is highly recommended to have all these features linked in place prior to the initiation of the fullfledged program.
Budget and Funding
Funding and budgetary issues are the key challenges for many online learning
programs. On one hand, the development of a highly competitive, professional
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
286 Levy and Ramim
online learning program is dependent on adequate funding for cutting-edge
hardware and software, a highly trained staff, and incidental expenses such as:
toll-free telephone access for students, and adequate office space. On the other
hand, many online learning programs are faced with the challenge of either
minimal funding or even insufficient funding to begin with. Such a state can
trigger a “domino” effect, where the limited or decreased funding reduces the
quality of support, development, and other needed resources (Alavi et al., 1997).
Consequently, funding sources must be incorporated as a key component of the
implementation plan or be added to current programs to avoid such derailing. One
solution for that includes an application for an institution, state, or federal grant
to provide the seed funding for the project. Once the project has started and
courses are being offered, the project can rely on its own funding and even
deliver back some of the funding to the institution.
Online learning courses require a tremendous amount of development, student
and faculty support, infrastructure, and other resources, which in most cases are
not provided by the university or institution. Therefore, an additional fee is
needed to cover such operations. It is recommended to institute a flat fee for all
online courses, rather than differentiate and set different fees based on the
demand, in the same way universities charge the same tuition fee for business
courses as for art and sciences or general education courses. This “across the
board” fee for online learning courses should be collected and utilized for the
maintenance of the program. It is observed that several universities charge in
the range of $250 to $500 over standard tuition for online courses1. For private
universities, such an additional fee can be added into the general term fees in the
same fashion as parking, health, lab fees or “over tuition fees” are added onto
students’ tuition each term. For state or public universities, the common and
recommended way of collecting such funds is by adding an added-value charge
for all online learning courses as an “over tuition fee” or computer lab fee. An
over tuition fee is defined as an assessed fee charged for certain classes on top
of the current state fees to cover the special expenses such a course or program
accrued. In some universities, both private and public, some portion of such fee
must be shared as their overhead charges, while the rest of the funding can be
diverted into the program.
Infrastructure
Software
When looking at in-house development of a customized platform, the school must
be aware of both the costs and benefits associated with such avenues. If special
features or customized features are needed, a customized solution of some form
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Financing Expensive Technologies in an Era of Decreased Funding
287
is probably necessary, although not always the case. We will elaborate further
below on a better avenue to pursue. Schools should determine to what degree
their desired features are unique or non-standardized and how much effort will
be needed to develop such features. If the unique features desired by the school
are not addressed by any available commercial packages, a thorough investigation is needed. One aspect of the investigation should look into the costs
associated with such development including: time to develop, salaries for
developers, upgrades and scalability, proprietary versus open code, training
material, etc. The other aspect of the investigation should look at the benefits that
will result from the development of a customized platform in comparison to an
available commercial solution. If the desired features are standardized, the
school is better off with a commercially available platform, rather than going
through a system development life cycle.
It is the beauty of Internet technologies and web features that allow integration
of tools on a component modeling basis. In other words, when a school, for
example, is in need for a unique Web tool to allow students in electrical
engineering to perform some virtual instrumentation testing, a module can be
developed to accommodate such a feature and be plugged into a commercial
package. Hence, it will provide both the benefit of robustness and company
support for a steady online learning platform and the benefit of the desired
customized feature to accommodate the needs of a particular professor or
department. In that regard, it is also possible to combine different modules from
different vendors. Although that may cause some technical limitations, the
benefits may outweigh the limitations. Institutions can investigate the integration
of asynchronous (non-live) commercial online learning platforms, e.g., WebCT™
or Black Board™, with synchronous (live) commercial tools, e.g., Centra™,
WebEx™, or eRoom™, to provide increased features mostly desired by faculty.
Higher educational institutions are in the business of providing education and not
in the business of software development (Levy, 2001). Therefore, a wiser way
of pursuing such implementations will be to evaluate the current commercially
available packages and determine which platform best addresses the needs of
the school, provides better support, allows easy upgrades, integrates best with
current platforms on-campus, and is scalable. Choosing a good and credible
solution can be a very critical decision. Discussion with users of commercial
solutions from other institutions can provide fruitful insights on potential implementation problems or success avenues. Taking the time in examining and
evaluating commercial platforms can make the difference between a successful
program and a costly failure.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
288 Levy and Ramim
Hardware
Evaluation of existing hardware or a proposal for needed hardware must be
included as early as the strategic planning stages of the project. It is common to
separate the hardware infrastructure issue into two main avenues: outsourcing
and in-house. In the event that competent employees with experience in
hardware infrastructure are not likely to be found in-house or may be difficult to
find, an outsourcing strategy may be the appropriate solution. It is recommended
to investigate the cost associated with large scale operations at the initial stage.
Some hosting services will provide a reduced rate for initial implementation, but
dramatically increase the rate once the program is growing and expanding both
in size of the hardware and bandwidth.
In the event that competent employees can be hired or used in-house, a better
avenue can be pursued by the use of existing campus infrastructure (Levy,
2001). Looking at in-house implementation of such a solution requires attention
to the subcomponents needed to link the hardware piece. Such subcomponents
include: networking and telecommunications, server architecture, along with
backup devices and backup policies and procedures. The increase use of
network traffic is commonly an overlooked component and may cause a
bottleneck effect, thereby reducing the confidence of faculty and students. It is
recommended to perform network testing and feasibility analysis prior to
implementation to adequately support such a project in-house. The emerging use
of minicomputers (or small to medium servers) for e-commence solutions has
accelerated the development of server scalability and modular-componentbased methodology to hardware support. This allows institutions to start with a
small installation and scale up by integrating more servers to the cluster as they
grow.
The last hardware subcomponent requiring attention when considering in-house
implementation addresses backup devices and policies. It is better to look at
backup in the analogy of an “onion.” The same way that an onion contains many
layers, a good backup plan and procedure will include several layers of a backup
process. It is recommended to look at several backup devices and maintain
several backup methodologies, such as instant backup to another server, to
magnetic tapes, and to DVDs.
High Quality Support and Development Team
Institutions should not spend the time and money on training professors to
develop their own courses, just as we don’t train vehicle drivers to assemble cars.
Rather, they should train professors to effectively use the tools and to deliver
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Financing Expensive Technologies in an Era of Decreased Funding
289
their content via the Internet in the same way we train vehicle drivers to drive
and obey road signs (Levy, 2001). It is best to assemble a professional support
and development team coordinating online course development with the professors and supporting students, rather than have the professors develop their own
courses.
In some institutions, a partnership is established with a development and hosting
company. One major limitation of such an avenue is that such companies usually
do not reveal the pitfalls and complications most likely to emerge during the
development and implementation of an online learning program. When time
comes, they capitalize on it and increase charges due to the dependence of the
educational institution.
A professional support and development team can be utilized as an outside
consulting firm on the basis of “per project hire,” rather than a partnership as
noted above. Another solution can be a team of instructional media developers,
programmers, and other support staff employed by the institution. In some cases
it might be simpler, and possibly cheaper, to manage a team within the institution,
rather than contract an outside vendor. Retaining IT and instructional media
developers in educational institutions is often a challenge nowadays. However,
institutions can provide some incentives, such as partial or full tuition reimbursement or other benefits in order to retain competent employees. In some cases,
using an inside group can provide a great leap, as these employees know the
environment and settings of the institution, with a limited learning curve for these
issues as compared with an outside group. Using an outside consulting company
or Internet course Development Company can be quite expensive and may
require considerable coordination efforts. Furthermore, most publishers today
provide canned content (electronic package or “e-pack,” for short) that is based
on the textbooks they have published, thereby extensively reducing the development time of the content.
A good team will eventually include: (a) a program director, the decision maker
and motivator of the team; (b) a program coordinator or assistant, to manage the
daily operations and serve as a team leader; (c) system administrator(s), one or
two team members who are dedicated for hardware, software or infrastructure
issues; (d) multiple support staff and developers, to perform the daily support for
both students and faculty, along with the development of new content; and (e)
graphics and video production team member, to perform the development of
professional graphics, audio and video manipulations. If it is also possible, one or
two marketing coordinators will help increase the visibility of the program and,
in turn, help increase funding.
Clearly, when starting an initiative, it is highly unlikely to have such a robust team.
Following the process suggested in this chapter will enable institutions to
gradually increase team members and eventually, after few a semesters, reach
a point where such a team is in place.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
290 Levy and Ramim
Policies and Procedures
As the first step to establish a high quality program, establishing guidelines for
official policies and procedures similarly to the one used for on-campus courses
is recommended. Teaching requirements should be defined in terms of academic
and professional experience essential for course instruction. Both professors
and students should maintain a minimum technical proficiency to prevent the
technology from becoming a hurdle in the education process (Levy, 2001).
Technical workshops should be developed for newly hired professors, along with
a short orientation for students. Best practices show that the use of an online
learning system by a faculty member for at least one semester as a web-assisted
supplement for their on-campus course can facilitate a smooth foundation
whenever the faculty member proceeds to teach online. Some institutions
establish a mentoring program where new faculty members are being mentored
during their first online term by experienced online faculty. Such mentoring has
proven vital in the event other initial trainings or a Web-assisted period is not
feasible.
A Policies and Procedure manual usually includes documentation on issues such
as:
•
Teaching Requirements, including: academic experience, professional
experience, technical proficiency, and other competencies.
•
New Faculty Hire Mentorship, including: contacts, FAQs, technology
setup, best practices.
•
New Course Development, including: learning objectives; online assessment types, student motivation techniques, information sources, syllabus
development, and textbook selection.
•
Facilitating an Online Course, including: course orientations, instructor
accessibility, grading, motivational techniques, continuous improvement,
and evaluations.
•
Student Issues, including: e-registration, e-advising, e-bookstore, e-library,
grievance, and online student code of conduct.
Successful Pilot Program
Often, the temptation to launch a full-fledged online learning program is
tremendous. Nevertheless, a proper gradual process is recommended, especially
in the first two years or so. In most successful projects, such as the example
discussed below, following the planning stage is a small scale pilot program. It
is recommended to start with Web-assisted or Web-enhanced capabilities for
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Financing Expensive Technologies in an Era of Decreased Funding
291
current on-campus courses, rather than with full-fledged online courses. This
will allow faculty to learn the system and get comfortable with the technologies
without the pressure of swiftly adjusting to a new medium of teaching. It is also
recommended to start with faculty who are “first adopters” of technology, as
such programs rely heavily on technology and provide close monitoring and
support to all students attending online courses.
Web-assisted courses will also allow students to get used to the technology so
that when time comes to take a fully-online course, technologies are not a major
challenge to overcome, allowing them to concentrate on their learning activities.
As time progresses, usually a semester or two following the initial implementation, students and faculty adapt to the system, a higher emphasis should be given
to content and pedagogy issues. It is often the case in online learning programs
that the “learning” is kept missing whenever the “online” or the advanced
technologies takes center stage (Hiltz et al., 2000). By progressing the pilot
program with a Web-assisted or Web-enhanced component to on-campus
courses, a greater emphasis can be placed on the learning process and engagement, as the technology is not a challenge anymore.
Incorporating feedback and making adjustments to policies and business processes is a valuable outcome of the pilot program. As part of the accreditation
process, feedback and adjustment for learning objectives and teaching methodologies (what works and what doesn’t) is needed. Doing so following the pilot
program not only helps the institution in developing an effective and successful
program with the potential for an increase in funds, is also useful for accreditation
purposes.
Quality Assurance
Quality assurance involves two components. The first deals with the pedagogy
aspect and the effectiveness of the learning experience. The second component
deals with the technology aspect and the quality of the product. In the case of
an online learning program, the quality of the product will refer to the online
course.
Pedagogy
The Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business’s (AACSB) newly
proposed accreditation standards specify that business schools will be required
to demonstrate students’ achievement of general and management-specific
knowledge (AACSB, 2002b). AACSB suggested that business students will
meet all accreditation standards, regardless of the delivery mode of the program
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
292 Levy and Ramim
(AACSB, 2002b). They also noted that both on-campus and online business
programs must strive for the same, or very similar, goals or competencies
(AACSB, 2002b). They also suggest that business schools will be required to
demonstrate the process by which they judge such learning achievement (i.e., the
learning outcomes). Therefore, the pedagogy aspect of quality assurance plays
a central role in providing the guidelines for such accreditation requirements.
A high quality course includes clearly defined course objectives and assessment
tools, such as the ones used in a traditional on-campus course. However, it is
recommended to create incremental assessment as means of encouraging
students’ learning pace, constant interaction with the professor and discouragement of cheating. Useful assessment measures include weekly quizzes, as well
as multiple small and large assignments during the course of the semester.
Quality assurance improves over time as the online learning course infrastructure expands and best practices emerge. Continuous improvement and evaluations must be part of the program culture for an increase in effectiveness. As the
program progresses, a yearly faculty retreat can facilitate discussion on best
practices within the institution and improve the quality of teaching provided by
the whole program.
Technology
Technology should not become an obstacle for delivering the educational
experience. By the same token that schools are required to maintain their
physical classrooms and to make students comfortable when learning oncampus, technology should be transparent and free of errors and down-time
periods. The institution should spend time evaluating the current online learning
system and seeking one that best matches their expertise and budget.
Once selecting the online learning system, the institution should create a
standardized interface, thereby defining the page appearance, institution’s logo,
the professor’s image and biography, and common links to the institution’s key
sites such as library, registration, and technical support sites. The color palette
and banners should also be uniform, as well as a selection of communication tools
available to the learners. This will assure consistency and reliability for the
learners as they move from one course to another, providing a high quality
experience from the technology prospective and simplifying the job of the
programming team. This is similar to the uniformly brick-and-mortar classrooms
on-campus. The institution can assemble a task force consisting of representatives from the administration, academic instruction and students that will define
the appearance of the standard courses. Once the standard course is defined, it
is essential that the institution will continue to test and revise the course to ensure
high quality and functionality, particularly before the beginning of each semester.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Financing Expensive Technologies in an Era of Decreased Funding
293
Case Study: Financial Undertaking in an Online
Learning Program
In the spring of 1998, the College of Business Administration at a state university
in the southeastern US initiated an online learning program. A seed fund of
$50,000 was allocated for this initiative with the intent to launch new Web-based
courses. At the time, the college was running out of physical space to teach new
courses and the idea of teaching over the Internet, while dramatic and revolutionary, was a fitting solution. It complemented the college’s aspiration to encourage
faculty to blend new technology into the classroom. After evaluating existing
tools for online learning implementation, and composing a strategy plan, in July
1998 the college had decided to use WebCT as the platform for the online, webbased course delivery. Effectively, after several meetings with the university
computer services department, the college was able to secure a server and some
support to run the online learning platform. Thus, at the beginning of the online
learning initiative, the support and development team was wholly manned by the
university’s computer services department. Later, as the project progressed, the
college realigned the definition and duties of the support and development team.
The college also spent time working with other university and institutional
departments to develop and initiate the program. University Outreach assisted
in the establishment of the administrative code for online learning sections in the
university system. These section codes are associated with all online courses
that enable the “over tuition fee” collection for such special courses. An
agreement was maintained, stipulating that the online learning course, which by
definition constitutes any off-campus courses, will be registered under University Outreach and will accrue an additional $250 “online learning over tuition fee”
for each online course to help fund such an operation. As part of the agreement,
the university will keep 10% of the online learning over tuition fee. The rest will
be channeled back into the online learning program. To minimize involvement of
fee collection, this fee was set by University Outreach in the main university
registration system, tacking on the standard tuition once a student is registered
for such special sections and collected by the university along with the regular
tuition.
By the Fall of the 1998 semester, the first pilot course was launched with 23
enrolled students. The course was taught by one professor and supported by two
technical team members and the program administrator. During that term, a
progressive development of nine other courses was undertaken and one more
technical team member was hired. The college was pleased with the results of
the pilot course and the dean was eager to carry on with the project.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
294 Levy and Ramim
By Spring of 1999, the college offered 10 more online courses (fully-online),
seven at the undergraduate level, and three at the graduate level. Total
enrollment during that Spring of 1999, was 193 students, an average of 19
students per course. Since the college had forecasted low enrollment during
typical summer semesters, only five online courses were offered during the
Summer of 1999 term, two at the undergraduate level, and three at the graduate
level. Total enrollment for the Summer of 1999, was 108 students, an average of
21 students per course.
With the online learning program well under way, the strategy concentrated on
extending enrollment growth to 30 students per online course. As a result of the
need to support more students, an additional two support-and-development team
members were hired. The two included a graphic designer and an instructional
designer to assist with the course development. Until that point, most of the
support-and-development team members consisted mainly of graduate assistants. These two new members were not students and their salaries were slightly
higher. As the goal was to spend time on improving the overall academic quality
of the courses, funds generated from the online learning over tuition fees (see
section “Budget and Funding” for more information) in the pervious academic
year were channeled directly back to fund these activities.
During the academic year 1999-2000, the college began to experience deterioration in the level of support provided by the university computing services
department. As the number of courses and students increased, the demand for
high quality technical support and system reliability increased. An investigation
was underway on ways to shift the online operations from the university servers
to local servers at the college. An initial investment of $40,000 was channeled
for that project. Appropriately, these funds were channeled from the online
learning over tuition fees collected from students taking online courses. As of the
Spring of 2000, one of the support-and-development team members assumed the
responsibilities of system administrator and the main online learning operations
(WebCT, Media server, etc.) for the college shifted to the college level. In spite
of the added cost for the operation of the program, the control and ability to
provide 24/7 support at a high level was an appealing factor in determining the
move. From that point forward, a support-and-development team work schedule
was established to manage the help desk between the hours of 8 a.m. to midnight,
seven days per week. The transition was smooth, as we continued to work
closely with the university computing services. Despite this move, it is important
to emphasize that the college continues to rely on the university’s computer
services department for the overall infrastructure of the networking and telecommunication capacity for the online learning operations, as well as other
services, such as e-mail and synchronization of student rosters.
In September 2000, the dean of the college requested to establish a task force
to help develop policies and procedures for the program. A small group of faculty
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Financing Expensive Technologies in an Era of Decreased Funding
295
who helped initiate the program and the coordinator of the support-anddevelopment team were asked to serve on this task force. The online learning
task force has been chaired by the director of the program. Since the academic
year of 2000-2001, the group has been meeting twice a semester to discuss
general issues related to the program. During the academic year of 2000-2001,
the task force was assigned to develop the official Policies and Procedures
Manual.
During the academic year of 2000-2001, the college maintained the growth of the
online learning initiative and a new Global Executive M.B.A. (GeMBA) online
program was initiated. In pursuing ways to provide the best online collaboration
to graduate students, a new tool, Centra™, a live-online, learning collaboration
tool was acquired. A total of about $60,000 was allocated as a seed fund of the
GeMBA program, acquisition of the new tool (Centra), and the development of
the first three courses. As in the past, the funds were drawn from the continued
operation of the online learning program. Each year the college is graduating a
small, but cohesive, group of online Executive M.B.A.s. This year, 14 new
GeMBA students will graduate with an accredited M.B.A. degree from Florida
International University online. Although seemingly a small group, this cohort
includes students from eight different countries, including Argentina, Brazil,
Jamaica, Colombia, Mexico, Nicaragua, Venezuela and the US. The GeMBA
Figure 2. Growth of Fully Online Courses in Academic Years 1998-2003
C BA On lin e L earn in g (F u lly On lin e C o ur ses)
35
33
32
30
26
26
N o. of Fully O nlin e Co urse s
25
22
20
18
15
10
10
10
10
9
9
8
5
5
1
0
F all 1 99 8
S pr in g
1 99 9
S um m er F all 199 9
199 9
S pr ing
200 0
S um m e r F all 200 0
20 00
S pr ing
200 1
S um m e r F all 200 1
20 01
S p ring
20 02
S u m m e r F all 20 02
2 002
S p ring
20 03
T erm
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
296 Levy and Ramim
Figure 3. Growth of Fully-Online Students in Academic Years 1998-2003
C BA O n lin e L e a rn ing (F u lly O n lin e S tu d e n ts )
120 0
1 042
No. of Fully On line Stu dent s
100 0
9 48
80 0
76 2
6 62
61 3
60 0
40 0
32 6
206
193
20 0
1 72
2 01
15 3
138
10 8
23
0
Fall
199 8
Sp rin g
1 999
Su m m er
1 99 9
Fall
199 9
Sp rin g
2 000
S um m er
200 0
Fall
20 00
Sp rin g
2 001
S um m er
200 1
Fa ll
20 01
S pr in g
2 002
S um m er
200 2
Fa ll
20 02
S pr in g
2 003
T erm
program has become a success story at the university and throughout. A new
report that appeared in the December 2000 issue of Latin Economia ranked the
college’s GeMBA program as the 11th best in the US. The rankings, which stem
from a study of more than 700 accredited M.B.A. programs, praised the use of
technology as the driving force behind this program.
During the academic year of 2000-2001, a new goal was set to develop ten new
undergraduate business core courses for online delivery. For this purpose, three
additional support-and-development team members were hired and trained.
Collaboration with University Outreach on this project was established through
their funding of an additional instructional designer who was dedicated to work
on this project. By the Fall of 2001, all 10 undergraduate business core courses
were completed and two sections of each course were offered, totaling 26 online
courses. Total enrollment during that Fall 2001 reached 662 students, an average
of 25 students per course. This is evident from the growth in the number of
courses from academic year 2000-2001 to academic year 2001-2002 (see
Figures 2 and 3). In order to support first-time online students in keeping up with
the technology and learning how to use the online learning system, a CD-ROM
with videos and tutorials was produced. On average about 300 new CDs are
being shipped to students in every term since Fall 2001.
During the academic year of 2001-2002, a new target was set to develop online
courses for an undergraduate International Business major. Four more team
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Financing Expensive Technologies in an Era of Decreased Funding
297
Figure 4. Growth of Web-Assisted Courses in Academic Years 1998-2003
C BA O n lin e L e a rn ing (W eb -a s sis te d C o ur s e s )
60
50
46
48
47
46
N o. of We b-a ssist ed C ours es
43
39
40
37
34
32
30
27
20
12
10
7
5
1
0
F all 1 99 8
S pr in g
1 99 9
S um m er Fall 199 9
199 9
S pr ing
200 0
S um m e r Fall 200 0
S pr ing
20 00
200 1
S um m e r Fall 200 1
20 01
S p ring
20 02
S u m m e r Fall 20 02
2 002
S p ring
20 03
T erm
members were added to the support-and-development group, totaling ten team
members—not including the director of the program. By Fall 2002, four more
undergraduate courses were completed and at least one section from each
course, along with two sections of the previous ten business core courses, were
offered online. At the same time in which the online course offerings expanded,
the college, lead by the dean, has continued encouraging all faculty members to
utilize the online learning system to supplement their regular on-campus courses
(Web-assisted courses). As a result, one full-time team member was assigned
to assist faculty with incorporating online learning technologies into their oncampus classes (see Figures 4 and 5). By Fall 2002, the college offered 33 online
courses. Total enrollment was 948 students, an average of 29 students per
course.
By Spring of 2003, the College of Business Administration operated nearly 80
undergraduate and graduate online and Web-assisted courses combined. More
than 1,000 fully online students (not including the GeMBA program) were
admitted to the program, generating nearly $700,000 in annual funding for the
support of the program, as well as the support of the Web-assisted courses. The
online learning support-and-development team provides system administration,
development and support for faculty, as well as technical support for students
(now consisting of nine full-time and three part-time members) for a total of 370
hours per week. The team includes: a program coordinator, team leader, system
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
298 Levy and Ramim
administrator, graphics developer, audio and video specialists and other developers. The support-and-development team operates between 8 a.m. to 12 midnight,
seven days a week. The support team operates mainly on campus, while some
of the support (early morning and late at night) is done remotely. The support
requests turnover averages five hours, including weekends. Students are advised
to e-mail the support team for any difficulties they encounter along with an
available toll-free telephone number. The college continues to collaborate with
University Outreach, particularly in matters related to student information
services, processing registration and payment collection. University Computing
Services provides telecommunication and networking support to the online
learning project as the college’s vision of virtual learning thrives.
A general overview of the revenues generated from the online learning “over
tuition fees,” as well as the expenditures associated with running such a program,
is available in Figure 6. It is important to note that the seed funding, although
calculated in the first term expenditure was a direct investment of the college in
such initiative. Furthermore, throughout the first two to three years where the
expenditures for supporting the online learning operations surpassed the revenues, the college provided the financial support covering the differences. On the
other hand, the online learning program provided some general services back to
the college that are not directly related to revenue generating. For example,
Web-assisted courses were not charged an “over tuition fee.” Yet, professors
Figure 5. Growth of Web-Assisted Students in Academic Years 1998-2003
C BA O n lin e L e a rn ing (W eb -a s sis te d S tu d en ts )
250 0
20 74
200 0
No. of W eb- ass is te d St ude nts
18 37
1 854
1 853
16 88
14 39
150 0
1 37 2
1 20 4
10 80
100 0
87 2
6 68
50 0
23 5
125
54
0
Fall
199 8
Sp rin g
1 999
Su m m er
1 99 9
Fall
199 9
Sp rin g
2 000
S um m er
200 0
Fall
20 00
Sp rin g
2 001
S um m er
200 1
Fa ll
20 01
S pr in g
2 002
S um m er
200 2
Fa ll
20 02
S pr in g
2 003
T erm
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Financing Expensive Technologies in an Era of Decreased Funding
299
and students were still able to use the system. It is expected that within two to
three years of operations, expenditures will increase at a lower rate than the
revenue generation, allowing the online learning program to channel some of the
funding back to the college for its initial seed investment, as well as the added
financial support throughout the first two to three years.
Summary and Discussion
In this chapter, we provided a roadmap for the successful implementation of a
self-funding, online learning program. The tremendous growth and potential of
online learning in the business world and corporate training centers in the past
few years is making its impact on the academic world. As more and more
individuals are stressed for time and demand to expand their education and
knowledge, a greater pressure is set on college and university administrators to
come up with innovative ways and new technologies to satisfy these needs. With
decreasing funding and reduced enrollments, educational institutions are facing
a great challenge as such innovative teaching methods and new technologies
require a massive seed capital investment, which most schools do not have in the
Figure 6. Fee Revenues and Expenditures in Academic Years 1998-2003
C BA O n lin e L e a rn ing (R e ve n u e s v s. E xpe n d it u re s )
3 00
2 50
$ ( x10 00 )
2 00
Revenues
1 50
Expenditures
1 00
50
Sp
r
in
g
20
00
03
2
02
20
ll
2
Fa
01
02
er
m
um
S
20
20
g
in
Sp
r
ll
Fa
er
m
um
S
20
01
01
20
00
g
S
pr
in
ll
20
m
um
S
Fa
er
g
in
pr
S
20
00
00
99
20
19
99
ll
19
m
um
S
Fa
er
g
in
pr
S
Fa
ll
19
19
98
99
0
T e rm
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
300 Levy and Ramim
first place. Consequently, higher educational institutions have to spend more time
investigating and planning the appropriate methods to implement their selffunding, online learning programs in the era of decreased funding.
Successful implementation of self-funding, online learning programs requires
careful research, strategic planning and forecasting. In this chapter a roadmap
for success is presented by reviewing eight key elements needed to achieve a
self-funding level. The key elements include: strategic plan, administrative and
institutional support, budget and funding, infrastructure, high quality support and
development team, policies and procedures, a successful pilot program, and
quality assurance. The approach recommended by the authors is based on their
experience in the development and implementation of several self-funding, online
learning programs. A successful case study on the implementation of a selffunding, online learning program is presented, as well as the methodology taken
for planning a large-scale, initial pilot program and rapid, steady growth.
References
AACSB. (2002a). Management Education Task Force Report. Draft IV.
AACSB. (2002b). Proposed Eligibility Procedures and Standards for
Business Accreditation. Draft September 12, 2002.
Alavi, M. and Leidner, D. (2001). Research commentary: Technology mediated
learning: A call for greater depth and breadth of research. Information
Systems Research, 12(1), 1-10.
Alsop, R. (2002). The top business schools: Who is up? Who is down? The Wall
Street Journal, September 8.
Arbaugh, J. B. (2000a). How classroom environment and student engagement
affect learning in Internet-based MBA courses. Business Communication
Quarterly, 63(4), 9-26.
Arbaugh, J. B. (2000b). An exploratory study of the effects of gender on student
learning and class participation in an Internet-based MBA course. Management Learning, 31(4), 503-519.
Arbaugh J. B. (2001). How instructor immediacy behaviors affect student
satisfaction and learning in Web-based courses. Business Communication
Quarterly, 64(4), 42-54.
Davids-Landau, M. (2000). Corporate universities crack open their doors. The
Journal of Business Strategy, 21(3), 18-23.
Davis, A. and Oster, A. (2002). Private eyes bid to help the INS track students.
Wall Street Journal, February 11.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Financing Expensive Technologies in an Era of Decreased Funding
301
Forelle, C. (2003). Elite colleges finally embrace online learning. Wall Street
Journal, January 15.
Golden, D. (2002). Some community colleges fudge the facts to attract foreign
students. Wall Street Journal, April 2.
Hafner, K. (2002). Lessons learned at dot-com university. New York Times,
May 2.
Hakim, D. (2002). Immigration policy to bar Canadian and Mexican part-time
students in US colleges. New York Times, July 9.
Hiltz, S. R., Coppola, N., Rotter, N. and Turoff, M. (2000). Measuring the
importance of collaborative learning for the effectiveness of ALN: A multimeasure, multi-method approach. Journal of Asynchronous Learning
Networks, 4(2). Retrieved May 20, 2003 from the World Wide Web: http:/
/www.aln.org/publications/jaln/v4n2/v4n2_hiltz.asp.
Levy, Y. (2001). E-Learning: An overview of next-generation Internet-based
distance learning systems. Proceedings of the WebNet 2001, Orlando,
Florida, USA.
Levy, Y. and Murphy, K. (2002). Toward a value framework for online learning
systems. Proceeding of the 35th Hawaii International Conference on
System Sciences (HICSS-35), Big Island, Hawaii, USA.
Roueche, J. E., Roueche, S. D. and Johnson, R. A. (2002). At our best: Facing
the challenge. Community College Journal, 72(5), 10-14.
Schemo, D. J. (2002). Plans on foreign students worry college officials. New
York Times, April 18.
Surek, B. (2000). Funding problems of technical education in developing
countries. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service, No. ED447290).
Swan, K. (2002). Learning effectiveness: What the research tells us. 2002
Annual Report on the Sloan Workshops, Orlando, Florida, USA.
Valbrun, M. (2002). Bush plan to curb foreigners’ studies is scaled back. Wall
Street Journal, May 9.
Endnotes
1
In the case study reviewed in this chapter, the university charged over
tuition fee of $250 for undergraduate course and $350 for graduate courses.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
302 Hagenhoff and Knust
Chapter XV
Education Networks:
Expected Market- and
Cost-Oriented Benefits
Svenja Hagenhoff
Georg-August-University Goettingen, Germany
Michaela Knust
Georg-August-University Goettingen, Germany
Abstract
Discussions about virtual universities, teleteaching or Internet-based
learning usually concentrate on pedagogical or technical topics. Ideas and
concepts about management, organization or profitability of Internetbased co-operations between universities are missing. This is remarkable
due to the ongoing discussion about the efficiency of universities, especially
in Germany. This chapter gives an example of an inter-university education
network and presents the expected effects of co-operational activities. Both
cost-oriented and market-oriented benefits are mentioned. Further on,
actual cost- and market-oriented advantages are explained by using the
case study of the education network WINFOLine. Finally the authors
mention some problems and open questions about how to manage (open)
education networks to initiate further discussion about this topic.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Education Networks: Expected Market- and Cost-Oriented Benefits 303
Introduction
The use of new media, for example Web-based trainings, is frequently called for
by practitioners and politicians in the field of higher education because German
universities can only compete on an international level by emphasizing teaching
based on information and communication technologies (Hagenhoff, 2003). By
using new media in education, teaching is to become more illustrative, motivating,
efficient, and, last but not least, less expensive. The idea of saving money,
however, should be critically examined because the use of new media is often
quite cost-intensive in comparison to conventional instruction at universities, at
least if the Web-based trainings are produced at the high quality standards
required for self-instruction. To achieve a quality improvement in the field of
online education, it is essential to avoid a simple stringing together of pure HTML
text pages. A uniform interface of the studying platform, simple serviceability,
a good didactic-methodical concept, a meaningful visualization (in the form of
short animations), a fullness of exercises and different ways of synchronous and
asynchronous communications are just some aspects to be considered during the
production of high-quality Web-based trainings. The high costs for the development and operation of such high-quality Web-based trainings often turn out to be
a problem, because they usually cannot be borne by a single institution. Besides,
it is necessary to reach a large number of students since otherwise the expensive
teaching material will not pay off. For this reason it is useful to establish cooperations between education service providers in the field of higher education.
We describe the benefits that arise from such co-operations from the point of
view of the co-operational partners. We do not consider potential benefits for the
end customers (the students) in this article. The aim of this article is to show the
benefits that arise from a co-operation between education service providers in
detail. In order to do this, we will first describe the basic types and goals of
education networks before turning to the practical example of WINFOLine,
which will then illustrate the different groups of advantages. Finally, we discuss
some open questions, which will have to be answered in the future.
Basics
In the following, we will first give a precise definition of the term “education
network” in order to be able to analyze possible advantages. In the next step, we
will introduce WINFOLine as a practical example.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
304 Hagenhoff and Knust
Ideas and Aims of Co-operations
The construct of co-operation (Hess, 1999)1 functions as a starting point for the
term network. For years, scientists have used various ways of trying to define
the term co-operation. Most of these attempts have come to the conclusion that
a co-operation is a tacit or a contractual partnership of convenience between at
least two legally and economically independent partners who, for a specific
period of time, pursue a common goal in a job-sharing fashion (Grochla, 1972;
Knoblich, 1969; Rotering, 1990). With regard to inter-university co-operations,
the partners are either associated with universities or interested in the development of educational offers and their contents, this includes individual departments 2 or teachers, as well as companies not directly related to the university,
such as partners from the practical field, sponsors or learning platform suppliers.
Through years of research in the field of co-operation, multiple goals, like
increases in efficiency or power, as well as time and cost-saving measures, can
be taken from the respective specialized literature (Porter and Fuller, 1989;
Beck, 1998; Ebert, 1998; Eisele, 1995; Picot and Jaros-Sturhahn, 2001). Often,
the list of individual goals is highly enumerative and sometimes the dividing lines
are blurred. In the following, the author M. Ebert is thus to be used as an example
of someone who has, in a first step, reduced these multiple goals to one prime
goal: “The realization of synergy effects.” This means that, through the cooperation of multiple partners, advantages which one partner would not have
been able to achieve by himself can be achieved. By taking this step, two main
groups of goals can be identified: the cost- and market-oriented goals. The costoriented goals are primarily reached by economies of scale, which are realized
by distributing the necessary tasks on the respective party which is most
competent here. Therefore, a more efficient production process can be expected. Market-oriented-goals, on the other hand, can be primarily reached by
strengthening their own market position in relation to other parties involved in the
market. In a second step, M. Ebert then uses the three basic phases of the
process of the increase in value in order to characterize the aforementioned goals
in more detail. Input synergies appear prior to the production process and touch
upon the fields of purchasing, financing, Research and Development, as well as
securing resources. Process synergies appear as part of the actual production
process. After this production process, their improved coordination and output
synergies, for instance, can be realized through contacts to the market (Ebert,
1998; Hagenhoff, 2002). The partners of such co-operation can gain advantages
by aligning the co-operative tasks with these abstract goals. In the following, we
will examine these advantages in relation to the main point of interest, namely the
inter-university education co-operations.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Education Networks: Expected Market- and Cost-Oriented Benefits 305
Case-Study WINFOLine
WINFOLine is an Internet-based inter-university co-operation between the
institutes of information management of the German universities of Göttingen,
Kassel, Leipzig and Saarbrücken. The main aim of this inter-university cooperation was to attempt to achieve a high-quality enlargement of the individual
curricula by new Web-based trainings. Due to limited resources, the institutes
would not have been able to achieve this in the solo run. The co-operation was
established in 1997. It was initially founded by the Bertelsmann-Foundation and
the Heinz-Nixdorf-Foundation (Ehrenberg et al., 2001). Since 2001 WINFOLine
has been sponsored by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research
as part of the promotional program “Neue Medien in der Bildung” (New Media
in Education). It became an open education network which can be joined by any
other university.
The pursued aim of WINFOLine is the creation of a university and federal, state,
general education network in the German university landscape. The focus of the
education network is the Internet-based education in the field of information
systems. The Web-based trainings used by all partners should be produced
according to high quality standards. The pursuit of quality, as well as economic
thoughts, led to the foundation of the education network.
During the first phase, each of the four core teams produced two Web-based
trainings, resulting in a pool of eight online courses which were supposed to be
used for the primary university education. The four information management
departments integrated these online courses into their already existing curricula
according to their needs. By adding other, thematically related, courses to their
own curricula, the departments took the chance to broaden and deepen their
curricula without giving up on the department’s independent research and
teaching. The departments which offer the actual online course imported by
other universities are also responsible for providing numerous support options for
everyone, because they have the necessary competency. The Web-based
trainings developed by the four departments of information management are
collected in a jointly used pool and the students of all the universities involved can
use all of these Web-based trainings, regardless at which of the four universities
they are enrolled. The credit points acquired in the courses are accepted by each
of the participating universities (Scheer et al., 2002). Since WINFOLine is an
open education network, other education service providers have the chance to
broaden and deepen their curricula by participating in this open education
network as well.
During the second phase, the focus was and is still on both the exchange of the
eight primary university education courses mentioned above and on the produc-
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
306 Hagenhoff and Knust
tion and marketing of saleable education products and offers.3 The education
network WINFOLine developed the online-based “Master of Science in Information Systems” as the first marketable education offer. Students from all over
the world have been able to participate in this program of study since the fall
semester of 2002/2003. The Master of Science is an interdisciplinary program
which can be divided into three major sections: namely, information management,
computer science and business administration. Especially students with at least
one year of work experience, who chose a different major in their primary
studies, are targeted with this further education offer. Within 15 months they are
able to acquire another internationally accepted university degree in the IT area.
This further education course is not only open to full-time students, but also to
those in employment, who will benefit from the online-design and finish this
course in their spare time. In order to enforce the online character of the course,
the amount of time students actually have to be present at one of the four core
universities has been reduced to a minimum. As a result, students must only
travel to one of the four core universities for testing or for participating in a twoday project seminar. Therefore, students from Japan, Russia and Poland have
already been successfully admitted into the program.4
The four institutes of information management of Göttingen, Kassel, Leipzig and
Saarbrücken operate the organizational and technical infrastructure for the open
education network and the Master of Science in Information Systems as a core
team and make sure that the established quality standards (e.g., regarding the
didactic-methodical arrangements of the courses or the support scenarios, like
mail support, chats, hotline-service, etc.) are met by the new partners (Hagenhoff,
2002).
Inter-University Co-Operations
Types of Inter-University Co-Operations
Through more than five years of experience with the education network
WINFOLine, as well as through multiple research projects, we have identified
two different forms of inter-university co-operations: organizational education
networks and networks solely focusing on education. However, mixtures
between different forms of co-operations are also possible.5
Organizational education networks are characterized by an extensive organizational structure which includes the entire business process of an education
provider (e.g., from the input interfaces to the production process up to output
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Education Networks: Expected Market- and Cost-Oriented Benefits 307
interfaces). The organizational education networks appear as one unit on the
educational market. Consequently, they have the opportunity to amortize production costs through distribution of the educational products or, rather, the complex
educational offers. Figure 1 shows that the business process is based on jobsharing between the individual partners of the education network depending on
competence and capacity. Within this network a supervision panel makes
strategic decisions,6 whereas performance managers are responsible for those
tasks that are necessary to produce the educational products and to distribute
them on the market.
In order to refinance the organizational education network, it can offer both
standardized or individual educational products (EP) without opportunities for
tutoring or examination, as well as complex target-group specific offers for
education, such as complete further educational degrees (Master of Science in
Information Systems). While configuring these complex offers for education, the
organizational education network has to make make-or-buy decisions to decide
Figure 1.
Organizational Education Network
Organizational Education Network
University
A
University
C
Task 1: EP Development
Task 2: Marketing
Subtask 1:
Concept
Subtask 1:
Concept
Subtask 2:
Generating
animations
.
.
Subtask
x:
….
Subtask 2:
Press releases
Task. n: …
Subtask 1:
…
…
Subtask 2:
…
.
.
Subtask
y:
… .
.
.
Subtask
z:
…
.
University
B
University
D
Strategic decisions
are reached by
Supervision panel
Operative procedures
are taken over by a
Performance manager
Configuration of
educational offers
Education offer B:
Individual course
Education offer A:
Program of study
Education offer n
…
Target group
A
Target group
n
Target group
B
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
308 Hagenhoff and Knust
Figure 2. Sharing and Exchanging Material or Courses in an Educational
Network
Students of University A
A
A
C
C
…
University
A
…
More EP
Students of University C
University
C
More EP
Exchange System
Students of University B
B
B
D
D
…
University
B
…
More EP
University
D
More EP
Students of University D
if their own educational products should be completed by additional organizations
which are not a member of the network. This can be necessary to furnish the
curriculum adequately (Hagenhoff, 2002).
The education network WINFOLine, which we have used as a practical
example, operates as an organizational education network by clearly distributing
the necessary tasks to the individual departments of the four core universities
and, thus, designing the marketable Master of Science in Information Systems.
The control panel consists of four professors from the different core teams. The
research assistants from the four information management departments function
as performance managers.
In contrast to the types of networks described above, there also is a form of
education network solely focusing on sharing and exchanging class materials
between the different network partners. This type of network is illustrated in
Figure 2.
In this form of co-operation, the educational products of the participating
universities are accessible through an exchange system. The students of this
inter-university co-operation have thus the opportunity to not only take classes
at their own university, but also to partake in classes offered in the exchange
system. 7
This type of network would also work for the practical example of WINFOLine,
which would then combine the aforementioned forms of co-operation. On the
one hand, WINFOLine functions as the aforementioned exchange system
between the four departments of the core universities which can be identified as
a network solely focusing on education. On the other hand, WINFOLine also
represents an organizational network in terms of configuration and marketing for
educational offers such as the Master of Science in Information Systems.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Education Networks: Expected Market- and Cost-Oriented Benefits 309
Expected Benefits of Education Networks
In this section we will describe which benefits can be achieved by an interuniversity education network. We will describe the benefits in a generic way. In
order to get a structured portrayal of the advantages or benefits within education
networks, we will use a simplified value chain, which can be divided into three
phases (input, production and output) as a basis.
Market-Oriented Benefits
Market-oriented benefits mainly arise from the stronger position on the market,
which can be achieved with respect to suppliers, to buyers and competitors alike.
Input
In organizational education networks, the concentration on competency is
supported by the distribution of the necessary tasks to individual co-operation
partners and the respective specialization of each partner within a network. On
the input side, the organizational education network can achieve market-oriented
advantages because one or a small number of partners can launch a focused
market analysis (concerning market structure or target group) for the whole
network. Through this specialization, the determination of the relevant educational product suppliers and educational products demanded on the market
becomes more professional (Eisele, 1995).
We assume that a co-operation consisting of a multitude of equal-minded
educational product suppliers has a strong outside appeal due to the reputation
of the participating professors (for instance, to other educational product
suppliers). An advantageous starting point can thus be expected for the
acquisition of new educational products and network partners (Picot et al.,
2001). At this point, without anticipating the output-side, we must explain that the
configuration of complex education offerings needs a multitude of individual
educational products (including the respective tutoring) in order to refinance
Figure 3. Simple Value Chain (Analogue Böning-Spohr and Hess, 2000)
Input
(Procurement)
Production
Output
(Sales)
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
310 Hagenhoff and Knust
them on the (further) education market (Hagenhoff, 2002). This variety of
educational products could be acquired by buying educational offers from other
suppliers, for instance. If the percentage of educational products bought
elsewhere is extremely high, though, the respective authority (the network)
which combines these educational products, transfers them into complex educational products and then sells them gets easily interchangeable. That is why we
consider it a better starting point if the education co-operation has a wide range
of educational products of their own and then combines them with educational
products of other suppliers. If an inter-university co-operation is extended to
non-university partners, it can gain additional market-oriented advantages on the
input-side, for instance, through a co-operation with the learning platform
supplier (Hagenhoff, 2002). Both partners can exchange their know-how, which
may result in a win-win-situation. Networks solely focusing on education can
gain market-oriented advantages on the input side by making it possible that a
multitude of high-quality educational products can be used. Thus, each network
partner only has to produce a limited number of educational products. So they can
improve their curricula with regard to quality and quantity by the help of other
thematically appropriate classes (Hagenhoff, 2002).
Production
Organizational education networks can achieve market-oriented advantages
with regard to production primarily by means of time and quality (Picot et al.,
2001). The option of specialization through job-sharing within a network supports
a faster and more efficient production of educational products. Individual
educational products should preferably be designed in a modular fashion in order
to be easily used for different types of education (such as further educational
courses on the university level or in-house training at privately-owned businesses) with small modifications. The quicker reaction to market needs, meaning
the fast realization of an educational product or a complex education offer that
is highly demanded on the market (such as an advanced training in the area of
business informatics), ensures important competitive advantages (Buchholz,
1996). Additionally, the specialization within the network supports a more
professional and more unified quality assurance of all educational products, both
the ones they have designed themselves and the ones they have bought from
others. The quality standards established by the network can improve its market
position if noticed and accepted by the market. Hereby, consumers form certain
preferences for these products. A kind of loyalty towards the product is thus
developed by the consumers and the prices become less relevant (Meffert,
2000).
In networks solely focusing on education, the actual production take place within
the individual departments. Yet, these networks are also able to achieve market-
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Education Networks: Expected Market- and Cost-Oriented Benefits 311
oriented advantages because the educational products are accessible more
quickly within the exchange system.
Output
With regard to organizational education networks, one can once again assume
that on the output side, co-operation permits the concentration of resources. The
respective analyses of possibilities for financing,8 as well as marketing and
public-relations strategies, can be launched more professionally and new markets can, thus, be opened up.9 Particularly, the access to international markets
is improved if the co-operation functions on this level. Through the increased
number of educational products within a co-operation (especially with regard to
modularly designed educational products), multiple combinations of study contents become possible. These contents can be offered on the market both as
simple educational products without tutoring or as complex educational products.
The access to potential target markets is, thus, improved (Eisele, 1995). To
amortize the production and distribution costs of the educational product and to
pass the break even point, a critical mass of consumers must be reached.
Certainly, as this critical mass increases, the more valuable (i.e., cost-intensive)
the computer- or, rather, Web-based teaching material is. By improving the
access to the target market and establishing co-operative market activities, one
can assume that this break even point is reached sooner. In addition to that, the
aforementioned number and authority of partners participating in the cooperation generates an effect which enforces the co-operation’s market position
in relation to other competitors and thus raises certain barriers to the market for
competing educational product suppliers (Meffert, 2000).
For the networks solely focusing on education, there is another advantage on the
market-side closely related to the image10 and the degree of fame of individual
professors and departments: The number of students at all of the participating
universities who can be reached with the educational products from one
particular university can, thus, be multiplied.
Financial Benefits
The financial benefits from co-operational activities within organizational education networks include the area of advantages of scale, which are created through
economies of scale, economies of scope and learning curve. Those education
networks can obtain advantages by concentrating individual activities on one or
only a few partners connected with the network. They can thus increase the
range of this activity or the speed of the respective learning activities (Porter and
Fuller, 1989). Additionally, they typically achieve these financial benefits by
dividing the necessary tasks on the basis of competencies available.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
312 Hagenhoff and Knust
Input
With regard to the input side, organizational networks can achieve process
optimizing in the area of acquisition marketing, for instance, if one partner takes
on this task for the whole network, thus avoiding redundant activities. Additionally, those networks can accomplish these financial benefits if costly equipment,
which can be used by the whole network, is bought only once (Hagenhoff,
2002).11
On the input side, networks solely focusing on education also profit from the costsaving exchange of high-quality educational products and the respective tutoring. In order to improve the curriculum, both with regard to quality and quantity
through additional classes, there is only one alternative: costly teaching assignments which would further strain the universities’ budgets.
Production
Within this area of the business process of organizational education networks,
one can observe numerous financial benefits connected to research and development, as well as to product design and configuration (Rotering, 1990). With
regard to research and development, an education network profits as the number
of the participating partners increases. The different perspectives, experiences
and competencies enhance the creativity essential for the realization of new
educational products (Picot et al., 2001). For these forms of co-operation, we can
also assume that benefits will arise if information is shared within networks solely
focusing on education. We identified personnel costs as an important cost factor
during the production of educational products (Hagenhoff, 2002). The necessary
tasks can be roughly divided in collecting and structuring contents, devising a
didactic concept, realizing media objects (such as flash animations, graphics,
video and audio-cuts, as well as text objects), assembling the educational product
and coordinating the whole process (Hagenhoff, 2002). By combining tasks at
those locations within the education network where the core competencies are
located, substantial learning curve effects — and thus advantages of scale —
can be expected. These effects positively influence the financial situation (Hess
and Schumann, 2000). Additionally, we can expect more efficiently used
capacities, both with regard to personnel and to hardware and software. This is
because redundant activities can be avoided and, thus, time and costs can be
saved (Rotering, 1990).
Output
On the output-side, education networks can attain financial benefits by multiple
uses of individual educational products (Rotering, 1990). Within a co-operation
of numerous partners, it is possible to develop a large number of Web- or
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Education Networks: Expected Market- and Cost-Oriented Benefits 313
computer-based contents, which can be, relative to their purpose, combined in
different ways in order to make them available on the market for different target
groups.
As already mentioned in the beginning, the development of high-quality, Webbased educational offers is rather costly. The number of educational products
one supplier can have in store will not be sufficient to configure complex
educational offers, such as further educational courses.
Process Comprehensive
Organizational education networks can attain process comprehensive financial
benefits by simplifying the adjustment mechanisms of all necessary tasks within
a co-operation. We can assume that the adjustments within a co-operation can
be realized more easily and, therefore, cheaper compared to non-co-operating
organizational units trying to make the same adjustments (Hagenhoff, 2002). The
improved access to specialized knowledge and abilities within a network forms
another group of advantages (Porter and Fuller, 1989).
Actual Cost- and Market-Oriented Advantages of the Education
Network WINFOLine
In the following, we will demonstrate how the advantage categories we have
already discussed in theory can be applied to the practical example of
WINFOLine. These market- and cost-oriented advantages have been achieved
by using the exchange system as part of the primary university education, as well
as by the introduction of the Master of Science in Information Systems as a
further educational degree. Market-oriented advantages, meaning advantages
which were realized by strengthening WINFOLine’s own market position in
relation to others, were less significant than cost-oriented advantages. It turned
out to be both sensible and productive, however, to distribute clearly outlined
tasks to the respective core team, which already had the necessary know-how.12
As a result, the development of the curricula, as well as development of the
respective outline of studies, the regulations for the conduct of an examination,
the admission policy, and the fee scale, could be further advanced at those two
departments which had before been able to gain the necessary know-how
through different types of restructuring within their own universities (such as the
adoption of a department-wide credit point system). Likewise, we were able to
allocate the project’s technical realization to an additional core team partner who
already had the required technical know-how. This procedure enabled us to
quickly complete the design of the Master of Science, which could thus be
introduced to the market at a point of time when few similar products were
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
314 Hagenhoff and Knust
available and competitive advantages could thus be achieved. These competitive
advantages do not only pertain to the know-how acquired by introducing and
carrying out this Web-based further educational course, but also to the pioneer
position within the (further) education market, which is connected to that knowhow. The brand name “WINFOLine” has since been associated with this pioneer
position.13
Time has proven, however, that it is complicated to distribute tasks which are not
clearly distinguishable to the different core teams. The coordination process thus
gets too complex and additional coordination efforts eliminate the advantages
achieved by the distribution of various tasks. Within the education network
WINFOLine, each participating partner merely produced two education products as part of their co-operation. This pool of eight education products was then
made available for all partners and apart from being used in the exchange system,
the education products are also included into the further educational course
Master of Science in Information Systems. With regard to this program, these
eight education products do not only form the foundation for all course offerings,
they also prevent the education network’s interchangeability as a mere education
service provider. We were also able to take advantage of the outstanding market
expertise of professors from all four core departments and have thus encouraged
numerous other university teachers to participate in the Master of Science in
Information Systems. At this point, there are 15 university teachers from a total
of eight universities participating in the Master of Science who have added their
own Web- or computer-based courses to the further educational program.
Consequently, the students of the Master of Science profit from an excellent
range of classes.
With regard to this exchange system, the co-operation has led to an initial costoriented advantage: a money-saving exchange of high-quality, Web-based
courses was possible because teaching assignments within the exchange system
did not require funding. We were soon forced to realize, though, that exchange
relations between the different information management departments started to
get asymmetrical when they used more services (e.g., support for the WBTs
which were part of the exchange system) than they were able to offer.
Therefore, we are currently looking into a possibility for establishing an improved
exchange system which functions, for example, as a kind of clearing house for
the services used and provided (Hagenhoff, 2003).
An additional cost-oriented advantage was gained by buying just one learning
platform for all users. To present a uniform learning environment, a studying
platform was purchased by the education network WINFOLine. This platform
can be used for the administration of the courses and for the students of the four
network partners in the exchange system, as well as for the newly established
further educational course. One individual department would not have been able
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Education Networks: Expected Market- and Cost-Oriented Benefits 315
to afford the acquisition of this complex studying platform on its own and,
therefore, would have had to do without important functions. Additionally, costoriented benefits can be achieved in the area of technical realization of the new
WBT, because the education network WINFOLine shares the assembly tool
VLEG14 for the final assembly of the educational products. This tool was
developed by a member of one of the four core teams. In this fashion, substantial
“double investments” have been avoided in the area of framework programming.
After all, the available competencies are used jointly within the inter-university
co-operation WINFOLine. This is possible due to the establishing of a knowledge
intranet which is accessible to every member of the network. Important
knowledge can be stored within this intranet, such as information about how to
produce flash animations or how to handle the quality assurance. Despite a high
turnover of faculty and research assistants, the education network can thus
ensure a steady increase of knowledge (Hagenhoff, 2002).
Conclusion and Unsolved Questions
In the previous sections, we portrayed different forms of educational cooperations and the respective goals in a generic fashion. Further on, with the help
of a three-step process of the increase in value, we have worked out a multitude
of market-oriented and financial benefits. After that we explained some of them
with the help of the practical example WINFOLine. The following tables are to
give a comprehensive overview of these individual points. Networks solely
focusing on education and organizational education networks are not differentiated any further, though.
Yet, in addition to this multitude of advantages, there is also a whole string of open
questions and problems concerning inter-university education co-operations
which have so far remained unsolved both from a practical and a scientific
perspective:
Problems of co-ordination (Porter and Fuller, 1989): The steady necessity
to co-ordinate the imminent tasks binds management resources and can
possibly result in conflicts of interest. From this perspective, we expect that
coordination in polycentric education networks can cause conflicts and
high expenditures. Since the opening of the education network WINFOLine
in 2001, it is focally managed. In opposition to the polycentric form of cooperation, which was used in the years before, we expected to realize a
more effective coordination of activities, as well as a quicker way of finding
solutions. Additionally, co-operation-related costs should not be neglected.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
316 Hagenhoff and Knust
Table 1.
Synopsis of the Market-Oriented Co-Operation Advantages
Process level
Marketoriented
Advantages
Input
Production
Output
Professional
Time
Focused
marketing
advantages
market
procedures
analyses
Quality
(educational
Respective
advantages
product
analyses of
suppliers and
possibilities for
demand on the
financing
market)
Opening new
Strong outside
markets (even
appeal
international)
Win-winUsing a pool of
situation by
education
co-operating
products to
with nonconfigure
university
different
partners
education
offers
Broadening
and deepening
Attaining
the own
break-evencurriculum
points sooner
Using a lot of
Refinancing
education
the activities
products and
Enforcing the
developing
market
only a few
position
own products
Professional outside appeal by concentrating on core
competences
Are the cost-related advantages diminished by time-consuming and costly
adjustments within the co-operation?
The inclusion of non-university partners: In what form and to what degree should
or must non-university partners be included in the education network at universities in order to adequately cater to the needs of the (further) educational
market? One possibility is to co-operate with partners from the field of practical
education, which have specially-trained staff at training centers. In this fashion,
not only could the scientific side take advantage of the educational products, but
also the non-scientific (further) educational side. Yet, to what degree are those
partners willing to co-operate with the universities? Because the integration of
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Education Networks: Expected Market- and Cost-Oriented Benefits 317
Table 2. Synopsis of the Cost-Oriented Co-Operation Advantages
Process level
Costoriented
Advantages
Input
Optimization
of processes
Acquirement
of cost-intense
equipment
only once for
the network
Saving
liquidity by
exchanging
courses and
tutoring
Production
Output
Multiple usage
Encouraging
of contents
creativity in
development
Learning
curves and
economies of
scale
Efficient use
of capacity by
specialization
Saving of time
by
development
of educational
products
Avoidance of double investments
Avoidance of redundant actions
Access and assurance of know-how despite of fluctuation of
scientists
Simplification of coordination
non-university partners is quite common in other countries, this problem is
especially pressing on the German market for primary and further education.
•
Quality standards: At this point, a multitude of quality standards exist in the
field of Web-based (further) education. Which standards will prevail in the
long run? Or rather, can individual standards either be bundled or brought
into line with each other? Who is to ensure a unified quality standard (by
standardization or else)?
•
Legal claims: If educational products such as Web- or computer-based
training are jointly produced within a network, one has to decide who owns
the legal rights to these products. Is it the professor who has provided the
content or is it the faculty and department who was responsible for visual
and audio realization? In this area, there is no unified dispensation of justice.
As a result, there is a worldwide necessity to settle this problem (Naquin,
2002).
•
Asymmetrical exchange systems (Hagenhoff, 2002; Hagenhoff, 2003):
Within networks solely focusing on education which exchange educational
products, no money needs to be spent on the usage of these educational
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
318 Hagenhoff and Knust
products and the respective tutoring. However, if an unequal number of
students uses these educational products and the respective tutoring at the
individual partner universities, this can result in an unfair distribution of
work between the co-operating departments. A model has to be developed
which is able realize the symmetric exchange of educational products and
the respective tutoring. One could develop a model, for instance, which
equates each product with a particular number of points and each department can only receive educational products if it has, through their own
offerings, collected enough points.
References
Beck, T. (1998). Kosteneffiziente Netzwerkkooperation. Wiesbaden, Germany.
Böning-Spohr, P. and Hess, T. (2000). Geschäftsmodelle inhalteorientierter
Onlineanbieter. Report no. 1/2000 of the Institute of Information Systems,
Dept. 2, Georg-August University Göttingen. Göttingen, Germany.
Buchholz, W. (1996). Time-to-Market-Management: Zeitorientierte
Gestaltung von Produktinnovationsprozessen. Stuttgart et. al., Germany.
Buzzell, R. and Gale, B. (1989). Strategien und Unternehmenserfolg.
Wiesbaden, Germany.
Ebert, M. (1998). Evaluation von Synergien bei Unternehmenszusammenschlüssen. Chemnitz, Germany.
Ehrenberg, D., Scheer, A. W., Schumann, M. and Winand, U. (2001).
Implementierung von interuniversitären Lehr- und Lernkooperationen: Das
Beispiel WINFOLine. Wirtschaftsinformatik, 43, 5-11.
Eisele, J. (1995). Erfolgsfaktoren des Joint-Venture-Management. Wiesbaden,
Germany.
Grochla, E. (1972). Die Kooperation von Unternehmen aus
organisationstheoretischer Sicht. In E. Boettcher (Ed.), Theorie und
Praxis der Kooperation (pp. 1-18). Tübingen, Germany.
Hagenhoff, S. (2002). Universitäre Bildungskooperationen — Gestaltungsvarianten für Geschäftsmodelle. Wiesbaden, Germany.
Hagenhoff, S. (2003). Tauschhandel an Hochschulen. wissenschafts-management, 1, 8-12.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Education Networks: Expected Market- and Cost-Oriented Benefits 319
Hess, T. and Schumann, M. (2000). Koordinator im Netwerk. iomanagement,
5, 80-83.
Hess, T. (1999). Unternehmensnetzwerke. Zeitschrift für Planung, 10, 225230.
Knoblich, H. (1969). Zwischenbetriebliche Kooperationen. Zeitschrift für
Betriebswirtschaft, 8, 497-514.
Kraemer, W., Milius, F. and Scheer, A. W. (2000). Eine Dokumentation. In
Bertelsmann Stiftung, Heinz-Nixdorf Stiftung (Eds.), Virtuelles Lehren
und Lernen an deutschen Universitäten. Bielefeld, Germany.
Meffert, H. (2000). Marketing - Grundlagen marktorientierter
Unternehmensführung. Wiesbaden, Germany.
Naquin, D. (2002, October/November). Online learning: Creating systemic
organizational change in higher education. International Journal on ELearning, 33-40.
Oechsler, W. and Reichwald, R. (1997). Managementstrukturen an deutschen
Universitäten. Forschung & Lehre, 6, 282-285.
Picot, A. and Jaros-Sturhahn, A. (2001). Kooperationen beim E-Learning
aufbauen. In A. Hohenstein and K. Wilbers (Eds.), Handbuch E-Learning. Köln, Germany. Chapter 3.4, 1-22.
Picot, A., Reichwald, R. and Wigand, R. (2001). Die grenzenlose Unternehmung
- Information, Organisation und Management. Wiesbaden, Germany.
Porter, M. and Fuller, M. (1989). Koalitionen und globale Strategien. In M.
Porter (Ed.), Globaler Wettbewerb, Strategien der neuen
Internationalisierung (pp. 363-399). Wiesbaden, Germany.
Rotering, C. (1990). Forschungs- und Entwicklungskooperationen zwischen
Unternehmen. Stuttgart, Germany.
Scheer, A. W., Beinhauer, M. and Gursch, B. (2002). WINFOLine - Vom
Projekt zum virtuellen Studiengang. In Bentlage, U. et. al. (Eds.), ELearning, Märkte, Geschäftsmodelle, Perspektiven (pp. 70-93).
Gütersloh, Germany.
Schellhase, J. (2001). Entwicklungsmethoden und Architekturkonzepte für
Web-Applikationen: Erstellung und Administration Web-basierter
Lernumgebungen. Wiesbaden, Germany.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
320 Hagenhoff and Knust
Endnotes
1
This chapter will not examine informal networks which form the basis for
the exchange of information and ideas between different suppliers of
education products.
2
The participating organizations are not universities itself but organizations
within universities such as institutes or departments. Institutes in Germany
are not totally autonomous in the economical and juridical sense but
professors are the decision-making authorities concerning steering the own
institute (Oechsler and Reichwald, 1997; Hagenhoff, 2002).
3
The education products can be standardized for anonymous customers or
individually developed. We use the term complex educational offers if
education products are combined with tutoring and examinations. A
complex education offer, for example, is a program of study offered from
a university.
4
Further information is accessible at www.winfoline.de.
5
Kraemer et. al. (Kraemer et. al., 1997) present a collection of intra- and
inter-university co-operations.
6
Strategic decisions, for example, are admissions of new network partners.
Are decisions done by all partners together the co-operation is steered in
a polycentric way and each partner has to send an agent into the supervision
panel. For decisions done by only one or a few partners the co-operation is
steered focally.
7
Analogous to organizational education networks, this kind of network could
be steered focally or in a polycentric way (Hagenhoff, 2002). Important
decisions within an educational network are the admission of new partners
or quality and design standards for educational products. Decisions about
integration of courses into their own curriculum are made by each partner
himself.
8
Such sources for financing can, for example, be marketable education
products or offerings or the acquisition of third party funds.
9
In Germany, universities are not allowed to take money from their students
who graduate the first time. Taking fees is only allowed in the case of so
called further education. Further education markets can be entered by cooperative configuration of study programs and financial facilities can be
developed by this way.
10
We know the importance of positive image from marketing. A positive
image is a basic factor for evaluating the quality of services (Meffert,
2000). A professor’s reputation can be affected by images.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Education Networks: Expected Market- and Cost-Oriented Benefits 321
11
This means for example licenses for hard- and software or equipment for
a stand at a fair.
12
These tasks include the production of education products, the responsibility
for marketing or acquisition activities, as well as the configuration of
education offerings.
13
Multiple studies have been conducted, particularly in the US, concerning
the chances and risks of innovation. The most famous example certainly is
the PIMS-study, which has conducted the respective research since 1972
(Buzzell and Gale, 1989).
14
VLEG means virtual learning environment generator. It is a tool to
assemble Web-based learning arrangements (Schellhase, 2001).
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
322
Krishnamurthi
Chapter XVI
Supplemental
Web Sites:
An Innovative Use
of Information
Technology for
Instructional Delivery
Malini Krishnamurthi
California State University, Fullerton, USA
Abstract
The population of today’s learners can be described as being more than 25
years old, with a job and/or family responsibilities. The vast student body
requires a flexible program that can accommodate job-related travel, need
for a more mobile learning environment and a learning method which may
be more entertaining and interactive than the traditional “stand and
lecture” method. In the process of innovating with technology in the college
curriculum, business schools are confronted with the issue of achieving a
balance between the issues of “richness” and “reach.” While members of
the faculty see an opportunity to enrich education, administrators see an
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Supplemental Web Sites: An Innovative Use of Information Technology 323
opportunity to realize economies of scale. Results from this empirical study
show that students perceive a face-to-face course supported by a web site
to be useful in enhancing their academic performance. Almost all the
students made use of the classroom lectures and web site resources and did
not feel the need to stay away from lectures.
Introduction
This chapter is organized around the following topics. The first section presents
some figures and facts about the many reasons for pursuing distance education
and builds a case for conducting research in the area of Web assisted education.
This is followed with a section where information and distance education
literatures are reviewed to develop the theoretical foundation for the study. Next,
the chapter describes the purpose of this study and then the chapter describes
the sample, measures and data analysis techniques used in this study. Following
this, the results of the study are presented and a discussion of these results
follows. In the concluding sections of the chapter, the strengths and weaknesses
of the study are discussed and suggestions for future research are presented.
Statement of the Problem
Business schools are facing rising pressures to increase the value added by their
services. To meet this challenge, business schools are undergoing fundamental
changes in the way they operate and are continuously seeking ways to create
future value (Bailey, Chow and Haddad, 1999). In an effort to determine the
forces of change that business schools face, Kemelgor, Johnson and Srinivasan
(2000) surveyed deans of business schools. They report that deans from public
institutions expect distance learning and using the Internet for research and
instruction to be significantly more important in the future. Further, they report
that in order to attract good students, educational institutions must continually
strive to innovate.
As a step toward innovation, business schools are clamoring to integrate Webbased instruction into the college curriculum, varying anywhere from supplementing face-to-face courses with web sites, to offering a complete M.B.A.
curriculum entirely online. A 1999 study reports that even the top business
schools in the country have come to offer their M.B.A. programs entirely online
(Mangan, 1999). MIT’s Sloan School offered their courses online in 1997 (Evans
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
324
Krishnamurthi
and Hasse, 2001). Corporations encourage continuing education and training and
are willing to reimburse tuition for online programs (Evans and Hasse, 2001).
Even the World Bank, well known for aiding the development of countries around
the world, has embarked on distance education programs (Anonymous, 2001).
This innovative strategy has resulted in an expanded student body that now
includes those beyond the traditional college-going student (Schwartz, 1995;
Okula 1999), such as those who have completed their education and need to reskill, those who wish to pursue life long learning (Evans and Fan, 2002) and those
who do not have access to a local business school, but wish to pursue higher
education without having to leave their job, families and community (Evans and
Hasse, 2001; Rosenbaum 2001).
So, given the changing needs of the student and advances in technology, we must
be cautious in embracing educational technologies and first fully understand their
implications. Maximizing the academic experience of the individual student
should be at the forefront of all the initiatives undertaken to incorporate
technology in the curriculum. The Campus Computing Project (1999) reports
that, “To integrate technology into instruction remains the single most important
information technology challenge facing U.S. colleges and universities over the
next two to three years.” This chapter looks at how Web-based technologies
have been incorporated in the college curriculum of a large public institution.
Insights are provided by examining the experiences of an instructor in the
Information Systems and Decision Sciences department at the California State
University, Fullerton.
California State University, Fullerton, (CSUF) is located in Southern California
and is in the vicinity of the world famous landmark Disney Land. It is one of the
23 universities that are fully funded by the state of California. There are
approximately 28,000 undergraduates and about 1,700 full and part-time faculty.
In a study done by two members of the faculty (Reisman and Dear, in the year
2000) about the evolution of Web-based distance learning strategies at CSUF,
they report that the university undertook the initiative of incorporating distance
learning technologies in the Fall of 1997. By Spring 2000 there were more than
600 instructors who had incorporated Web-based technologies in 720 courses,
affecting more than 20,000 students. At CSUF nearly 74% of undergraduates
and 86% of graduate students are employed and yet 62% of all students take 12
or more hours of course work. So, a typical student at CSUF is a working student
eager to receive a quality education at affordable prices from an institution that
takes its motto of “Where Learning is Preeminent” seriously.
Instruction can be delivered in several different pedagogical formats. The most
personal and labor intensive is a one-to-one instructor-to-student format. In this
case, the student is directed through the instructional material personally by the
instructor. On the other hand, the least labor intensive and most impersonal is a
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Supplemental Web Sites: An Innovative Use of Information Technology 325
student self-paced correspondence format, such as the kind one may find from
manuals or courses that may be offered entirely online. Somewhere in between
these two extremes is a format where the instructor delivers instruction to
multiple students in a classroom setting. It is this format that is examined in this
study and, more specifically, the researcher examines students in a classroom
setting which is augmented with a web site exclusively dedicated for that course.
In trying to make a case for a course dedicated web site, it is worth examining
the characteristics of traditional and online courses. In the traditional face-toface course, students go to campus, sit in a classroom at an appointed hour, talk
to the professor and fellow students, and turn in tests and assignments in hard
copy format. In the case of a Web-based course, students stay home, log on to
a personal computer or a lap top computer, gain access to the Internet, download
notes and materials any time, anywhere, stay online for however long they wish
to, chat with their professors and classmates, submit test and papers through email or digital drop box.
While the traditional method prevails and will probably continue to do so, students
have more opportunities than ever before to go to the Internet at the click of a
computer mouse. The NEA (National Education Association) reports that
faculty teaching both face-to-face courses and fully online courses found the
latter to be better in meeting the educational goals of providing access to
information and high quality course material. On the other hand face-to-face
courses did a better job of addressing individual learning styles (NEA, 2000).
Evans and Hesse (2001) report that 18 to 24 year old young adults found that
the online courses expected students to be self starters, demanded too much self
discipline and were too flexible, and they deprived them of a campus experience.
Rad (2002) reports online instruction unsuitable for courses dependent on
experiential learning and laboratory exercises and other interaction-based
activities. Ponzurick and colleagues (2000) report that their marketing M.B.A.
students preferred online education for reasons of convenience, career and
location, but would have ideally preferred face-to-face campus instruction
because they perceived this to be more effective and gratifying.
Having a face-to-face course supplemented with a web site can offer a richer
learning environment than either one offered alone (McEwen, 2001). So, a Web
assisted course which could blend the best in both the approaches of learning,
was seen as an ideal way to enrich the learning experience at CSUF and,
therefore, it became the subject of study in this chapter. Further, it would give
the young adults a good starting point (Rad, 2002; Eastman and Swift, 2001) to
get acquainted with the online tools and an opportunity to cultivate appropriate
learning behaviors for a fully online course that they might encounter in the
future.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
326
Krishnamurthi
Results from this study can have implications for faculty, students, university
administrators and designers of educational software. From the point of view of
students and faculty, having an experience with a supplementary web site can
be the first step in dealing with courses that may be offered entirely online. As
the paradigm shifts from being “teacher centered” to “learner centered,”
students will have an opportunity to identify new learning behaviors that they
have to cultivate in order to learn through technology intervention. Members of
the faculty will have an opportunity to identify new teaching and assessment
strategies that are suitable for teaching with technology. Educational technology
designers can have a better understanding of the real-life uses of their inventions.
Feedback from students can provide insights for technology design and redesign.
Background Research
An examination of the theoretical and empirical literature in the area of distance
education in general and course dedicated web site in particular led to the
selection of the dependent variable web site use. Some of the naturally occurring
needs of the students were examined in developing factors to predict web site
use. These needs are: “the need for a useful web site and a user-friendly
software to access the site,” “the need to work with fellow students and be
independent of time,” “the need to manage absences” and “to have an opportunity to do better in tests.”
Usefulness of the Web Site and User-Friendliness of the
Software to Access the Site
If students believe that the content of a course web site would be of use to them
and, further, if they believe that the content can be easily accessed via the
software, they are likely to visit the site more often. This assertion is based on
the diffusion of innovation theory. In this theory, diffusion means acceptance of
an innovation and adoption means a decision to continue full use of an innovation
(Everett, 1983, 1986). The theory suggests that beliefs and attitudes toward a
technology can be important determinants of technology adoption. The belief
that a technology is useful and easy to use can influence the users’ attitudes
toward that technology and, thereby, their decision to adopt that technology. This
belief has been empirically tested and found to be true in the case of computer
software (Bagozzi, Davis and Warshaw, 1992), e-mail (Gefen and Straub, 1997),
the World Wide Web (Atkinson and Kydd, 1997) and course web sites by Angulo
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Supplemental Web Sites: An Innovative Use of Information Technology 327
and Bruce (1999) and Arbaugh (2000). Therefore, perceived usefulness of a
course web site and the user-friendliness of the software can be expected to lead
to increased usage of a web site.
To Be Able to Work Together with Fellow Students and
be Independent of Time
Students must be computer and information literate by the time they start their
professional careers. Students must not only gain expertise in their chosen field
of study, but also be prepared for an environment characterized by online
communication and be able to work collaboratively with their colleagues using
the Internet and intranet tools.
Companies producing courseware offer a suite of features to support synchronous (same time) or asynchronous (different time) communication among
individuals and groups. The features range from very simple systems (e.g.,
electronic mail) to much more sophisticated systems that facilitate collaborative
learning (e.g., chat rooms, discussion boards and virtual classrooms with white
boards). Therefore, course delivery via the Internet can facilitate cooperative
learning experiences and the development of cooperative learning behavior
among students (Karuppan and Karuppan, 1999; Mangan, 1999; Brandon and
Hollingshead, 1999). Technologies that facilitate group communication are more
than just tools to supplement traditional classroom learning. Students get an
opportunity to see the work of other students which can inspire them to emulate
their peers. And so a totally different learning environment can be developed
which can be very enriching and can lead to effective career preparation
(Witmer, 1998).
Because the electronic medium can be flexible and independent of time and
distance, many researchers (Arbaugh 2000; Mangan 1999; Ragothaman and
Hoadley, 1999; Rad, 2002; Surrency et al., 2001; Lahey, 2002), report that course
dedicated web sites can help students to overcome temporal constraints.
Students and instructors can benefit from this by scheduling their activities to a
time frame that is more convenient to them. Further, students can have roundthe-clock access to course materials. DeSanctis and Sheppard (1999) summarize the experiences of students in a one-of-a-kind, global, executive online
M.B.A. program. The executive students appreciated the opportunity to learn
while they were working, traveling or living at home in a distant part of the world.
It was an opportunity for the executives to interact with research faculty and to
be associated with university life. Because of the asynchronous nature of the
communication medium, it was possible for students to bring in their diverse
perspectives to solve business problems and also to be able to share their rich
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
328
Krishnamurthi
cultural perspectives. The cyber classroom had students from many parts of the
world. Therefore, this study posits that the presence of a supplemental web site
can bring about collaborative learning and time independence and, thereby, lead
to increased number of visits to the web site.
The Desire to be Absent
Having a supplementary web site for face-to-face instruction can be a doubleedged sword. While the presence of a rich and well organized web site can invite
students, it can also tempt them to stay absent from the classroom. This can result
in the unintended consequence of instructors resisting to place course materials
on the web site because of the fear of losing students in the classroom. The
impact of classroom attendance has received very little empirical evaluation.
Karuppan and Karuppan (1999) report little or no impact on attendance when
comparing semesters in which the web site was used and the semesters when
the web site was not used. This study re-examines this issue of web site use and
classroom attendance. The presence of a web site can tempt students to be
absent more frequently and this can lead to increased visits to the web site.
Opportunity to Improve Test Performance
When students find that they are deficient in certain competencies and these
deficiencies hinder better performance, they may look for opportunities to
improve on their weak areas. This trend is very prevalent in CSUF because its
students are varied in their competencies. And so if students have the opportunity
to access course materials from a supplementary web site seven days a week,
24 hours a day, and are also able to communicate with fellow students
independent of time and distance, they could expect to do better in tests and
generally in the entire course by using this opportunity. Haworth (1998, 1999)
found this to be true in his studies. In another study, Slattery (1999) found that
there were more “A” grades in his class when using a web site. Hester (1999)
found that interactive sample tests on the web site were effective in that they led
to improved student performance in exams. In comparing average test scores in
courses that were taught entirely face-to-face with courses that were taught
entirely online, students performed equally well in online format (King and
Hildreath 2000) or better in online courses than their in-class colleagues
(Arbaugh 2000, Bartlett, 1997; Heines and Hulse, 1996; Kabat and Friedel, 1990;
Raymond III, 2001). Therefore, if a course is supplemented with a web site,
students are likely to use the site more often in the hope of doing better.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Supplemental Web Sites: An Innovative Use of Information Technology 329
Purpose of this Study
A review of the literature in the area of distance education shows that there are
plenty of studies that have examined the overall reactions to and satisfaction with
courses that were offered entirely online. Some studies have made an attempt
to compare face-to-face with online instruction and have discussed their relative
merits and demerits. However, there is a paucity of empirical studies to examine
the specific motivations of students for visiting course dedicated web sites.
Therefore, it is worth studying if students are visiting a course dedicated web site:
1.
To obtain more resources from the instructor.
2.
To communicate and collaborate with fellow students who may be hard to
reach.
3.
To improve their test performance.
4.
To catch up on lost ground because of having to be absent from class.
Methods
The purpose of this section is to describe the research site, the methods used to
collect and analyze data and the variables mentioned in the questionnaire. This
research was conducted at the California State University, Fullerton, California.
Subjects in this study consisted of undergraduate students in the Information
Systems curriculum in the Information and Decision Sciences Department. The
sample consisted of students from two sections each of Systems Analysis and
Design and Database Design courses.
A paper and pencil questionnaire was distributed to every student in the class on
the day of the final exam and was collected right away. Every student
volunteered to answer the questionnaire. This gave a response rate of 100%. In
all, 103 students responded to the survey. Data thus gathered was analyzed in
various ways to answer the research questions posited.
The questionnaire employed in this study was exclusively designed to capture the
data relevant to this study. All the questions were newly generated and the
questionnaire was completed after several iterations of refinement.
Section One of the questionnaire contained items to determine the biographic
profile of the student such as: year in school, major, ethnicity, age, gender, work
experience, computer ownership and access to the Internet. Following these
questions, statements describing the conditions of course environment were
stated and students were asked to express the extent of their agreement to these
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
330
Krishnamurthi
conditions. Responses to these statements were captured on a Likert scale
ranging from (1) Strongly Disagree, (2) Disagree, (3) Agree, and (4) Strongly
Agree. Usefulness of the web site was measured by the following variables: (1)
“web site usefulness in this class,” (2) “useful in downloading notes,” (3) “useful
in setting up an account for my project,” (4) “helped to improve academic
performance”was used to measure the need to improve test performance, and
(5) “instructor’s notes helped.” User friendliness of the web site was assessed
by variable number six: “I found the web site to be user-friendly.” The need to
collaborate and be independent of time was measured by variable number seven:
“Useful for exchanging notes with people whose working hours are different
from mine.” Variable number eight: “No need to attend class, since most of the
things I need to know are available on the web site” measured the issue of
attendance.
The courses considered in this study were taught by an instructor who had been
successful in teaching these courses face-to-face for a few semesters prior to
the semester in which this study was conducted. And so standards from the
traditional classroom were available and considered to be suitable measures
(Karuppan and Karuppan, 1999; Webb, 2001) for measurement of the Web
assisted course.
Results
Fifty seven percent of the sample consisted of males and 42% were females.
Eight percent of the students were Information Systems majors, 11% were
Management Science majors. Eighty-two percent of the students were between
the ages of 18 to 28, 15% were between 29 and 39 years, and 2% were between
40 to 49 years, reflecting the traditional college student population of a public
institution. Ninety seven percent of the students said that they owned a computer
and had access to the Internet either from home or school or both.
Table 1 summarizes the results of the regression analysis that was done to
identify significant independent variables that could explain the variation in web
site use. Twenty-nine percent of the variation in web site use was explained by
eight independent variables. The most important predicator was “web site
usefulness in this class,” the second was “useful in downloading notes,” the third
was “useful in setting up an account for my project,” the fourth was “helped to
improve academic performance,” the fifth was “instructor’s notes helped,” the
sixth was “I found the web site to be user-friendly,” the next was “useful for
exchanging notes with people whose working hours are different from mine,”
and the last was “no need to attend class, since most of the things I need to know
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Supplemental Web Sites: An Innovative Use of Information Technology 331
Table 1. Reasons for Using the Web Site
Var num
Variable name
1
Web site usefulness
2
Useful in downloading notes
3
Useful in setting up an account for my project
4
Improve academic performance
5
Instructor’s notes helped
6
Web site is user-friendly
7
Web site is useful in exchanging notes
8
No need to attend class
is available on the web site.” It is worth noting that all the variables that were
entered into the equation did prove to be significant predictors of web site use.
A two-tailed Pearson correlation between the web site use and the score shows
that these variables were highly correlated among the “A” group of students (r
= .43) followed by “C” group (r = .38) and then followed by “B” students (r =
.13).
Table 2 shows the mean score among the different user groups where the sample
was broken down by the degree of use, such as “use every day, several times
per week, once a week, several times a month and never.” The mean score was
84% among those who said that they never used the web site, followed by 81%
among those who said that they used the web site at least once a week and those
who said that they used it every day. The mean score was 79% and 76% among
those who said that they used the site several times a month and several times
per week, respectively.
Table 2. Mean Score Among Different Groups of Users
Web site users
Every day
Several times per week
Once a week
Several times a month
Never
Percent
2.4
16
35
42
6
Mean Score
81
76
81
79
84
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
332
Krishnamurthi
Discussion
This study treated the issues discussed in the information technology and
distance education literatures to an empirical assessment. Results from this
study lend support to the diffusion of innovation theory which argues that
perceived usefulness of a technology and its user friendliness can lead to a
decision to adopt that technology. Support for this comes from the variables
“Useful in downloading instructor’s notes,” “Useful in setting up an account,”
“Web site is useful in this class,” “Instructor’s notes helped,” and “This web site
is user-friendly,” all of which approached significance. Further, these results
support prior research by Arbaugh (2000) who found that perceived usefulness
of a course web site led to its use.
The need to use a web site to collaborate with fellow students by overcoming the
constraints of time and distance found support in this study and affirmed earlier
findings by Ragothanman and Hoadly (1999). The need to have an account for
the group project and be able to exchange notes with others found support in this
study and played an important role in determining the use of the web site. The
variable “Using a web site in this class helped me improve my academic
performance,” was a significant predictor of web site use and ranked fourth in
the order of importance. This affirmed prior research by Haworth (1998) and
Slattery (1999), who found that students in courses that were offered entirely
online performed very well. The variable “No need to attend class since
everything I need to know is on the web site” was significant in predicting the
web site use, since it entered the regression equation. A closer look at the
number of people who held this view showed that 33% strongly disagreed, 45%
disagreed, 15% agreed, and 5% strongly agreed. And so there were some
students who stayed away from class and might have relied entirely on the notes
on the web site, but they were in the minority. The majority of the students did
not perceive the web site as an invitation to miss class. On the other hand,
students downloaded the notes prior to the lectures and brought them to class and
lab sessions and elaborated on them during classroom lectures, as was observed
by the researcher. The attendance was as normal as it was in earlier semesters
when the web site was not used. This confirms the findings in an earlier research
(Karuppan and Karuppan, 1999).
The student mean use of the web site among the different grade categories were
more or less the same. The positive correlation between the variables web site
use and score among “A” (r = .43) and “C” (r = .38) students suggests that these
students were more concerned in improving their grades, rather than willing to
accept the status quo. It is possible that the “A” students were concerned about
maintaining their superior performance and, therefore, used the opportunity of a
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Supplemental Web Sites: An Innovative Use of Information Technology 333
web site to do better. In the case of the “C” students, their concern to strive to
do better might have been their motivation to use the web site.
Observation of the mean scores (Table 2) from among the different user groups
categorized from “used every day” to “never used” suggests that the highest
scores were earned by those who said that they never used the web site. It is
possible that these students relied entirely on class notes and studied from the
text and managed to get an “A” grade. This observation reflects the power of
empirical evaluation to be able to uncover naturally occurring phenomena.
The overall course grade point average was within the normal range of grade
point averages in the courses that were taught face-to-face in prior semesters
by the same instructor. There was no evidence of an unusually high grade point
average on account of using the web site. But, in observing the pattern of visits
to the web site among the different grade categories, “A” students used the web
site more than the “B” students and so did the “C” students.
The study reveals that students look for web sites that are useful, friendly to
access, able to provide the ability to communicate and able to provide an
opportunity to catch up and do better on exams. Therefore, the following
suggestions are made for each of these needs:
·As Weigel (2000) suggests, make the web site rich in content so that the students
perceive the site to be useful. Other than making just the instructor’s notes
available, set up hyperlinks for students to reach the web sites of other professors
and other sources of relevant information. For instance, setting up a link to the
local chapter of the Oracle users group can help students of SQL programming
language take part in discussions regarding database programming. Links to web
sites of various vendors of drawing tools and CASE (Computer Assisted
Software Engineering) tools can help students to download trial versions of the
software and try them and acquire additional skills. Select textbooks which have
excellent web site support for their material (Webb 2001; McEwen, 2001).
Publishers like Course Technologies and Prentice Hall assist authors by providing additional notes, power point slides, chapter quizzes, tutorials, exercises and
executable program code, to demonstrate a variety of programming topics and
issues discussed in the text.
·Instructors can design web sites with specific student needs in mind. Challenging activities at different levels should be made available for students in different
grade categories (“A” thru “F”). Interactive self-test and review modules,
access to past exams and tutorials can collectively have an impact on student
performance. In order to see significant differences in scores, instructors can set
up a process whereby students accumulate points for completing certain
exercises from the web site. This would force students to pursue the web site
more actively and can lead to better performance and higher scores as was
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
334
Krishnamurthi
evidenced by Webb (2001). Having a web site which is close to face-to-face
instruction and then expecting students to voluntarily visit the web site may not
lead to significant differences in test scores or grade point averages, as was
evidenced in this study.
Although this study showed that a supplementary web site does not deter
classroom attendance completely, it would be a wise idea for instructors to
counter balance classroom attendance with visits to the web site. Planning on
class discussion about issues identified in the “hot site of the week” on the web
site can make students feel the need to attend class. For instance, a plan to
discuss in class the successful implementation of the new operating systems
from Microsoft, such as Windows XP, can excite students to go to Microsoft’s
web site and read about any latest news about its successful implementation
stories. Further, informing the students that some questions from the discussion
will be on the test can motivate students to visit the web site, attend class and
prepare for tests. The downside effect of such a suggestion is that planning on
rich content and judiciously balancing lectures with web site material can place
a huge demand on the instructor’s time and instructors need to be aware of this
and budget their time accordingly.
·Select course software that is user-friendly and which facilitates communication among individuals and groups, and allows threaded discussions. During
lectures, pay attention to the communication patterns that emerge in the class and
take a proactive stance in communicating (Hartman and colleagues, 2002) using
the system’s messaging tools. The reason for this being that there are always a
few students in class who need clarification on the same issues many times. For
example, students can e-mail about exam dates or assignment due dates even
though this information can be found on the syllabus and on the web site. By
placing timely announcements on your web site, you can decrease the volume of
incoming messages and save yourself the “In-box shock,” as Hartman and
colleagues (2002) put it.
·Regarding selecting user-friendly software, university administrators also have
some suggestions to take. Universities must take a leading role and must
standardize the software to be used for developing web sites for all the courses
in the university curriculum. The reason for this suggestion is that students would
then have to be familiar with only one courseware. For instance, at CSUF the
university had leases with both WebCT and BlackBoard for sometime. During
that period, students had to be familiar with both WebCT and BlackBoard,
because some instructors used WebCT while others used BlackBoard. This
placed a big demand on students. Further, there were constant complaints from
faculty and students about WebCT not being user friendly. As a result, the
university decided to discontinue its lease with WebCT and opted to go with only
BlackBoard. Now, with all of the Web-based courses available only on
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Supplemental Web Sites: An Innovative Use of Information Technology 335
BlackBoard, students need to be acquainted with only one courseware and the
entire collection of Web-based courses in the school share the same features.
Strength and Weaknesses of this Study
This study was an unobtrusive study of student perception of a course-dedicated
web site. The natural setting greatly enhanced the basis of external validity. In
studies trying to explain communication patters and behaviors, field settings are
more appropriate than experimental designs with control groups. The fact that
the factors chosen for examination are deeply anchored in theory, lends some
protection to the problem of generalization (Kidder and Judd, 1986). The survey
instrument captured perceptual data in which measurement errors in responses
can place limitations on the study. The web site used in this study received verbal
feedback while it was in the process of construction in prior semesters and so
a formal pretest of the site was not undertaken. The course grade point average
in the same courses taught in prior semesters in a face-to-face mode by the same
instructor was used as a standard of measurement in trying to compare the
overall performance in the Web assisted class with the face-to-face class. Since
this study sought to examine, among other issues, the relative web site usage
pattern between the different grade categories, i.e., whether the “A” students
used the site more than the “B” students, and so on, the need for a control group
was not seen as necessary. However, the absence of results from pre-testing the
web site and absence of results from a control group can be seen as limitations
from a strict statistical point of view.
Furthermore, results in this study are based on students at one specific university
and may not be generalizable to students at other universities. Finally, due to the
small sample size, care must be taken in interpreting the results of this study.
However, they do shed light on the questions posed in this study and support the
assertions and are consistent with the findings of previous research. Results
from this study can be insightful for the sister campuses in the California State
University system.
Directions for Future Research
Future research activities can be directed towards improving the richness of
educational software. Studies can attempt to match the richness of the electronic
media with the learning task at hand. For instance, if the task is a case analysis
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
336
Krishnamurthi
that requires discussion and sharing various points of view, then electronic
discussion boards would be suitable. How comfortable are students communicating through this media can be a worthy study. Do male and female students
feel the same way about expressing themselves through electronic discussion
boards? Are language skills influential in the use of this media or are they a
deterrent? These are some questions to ask.
As the development of web sites snowball into well developed, effective and
matured sites, an issue that assumes significance in this context is the right to
ownership of effective web sites that members of the faculty might have
developed painstakingly. Although faculty may think they own the materials on
the Web, there is considerable debate as to who has the right to course materials
that have been developed with university resources and release time. Many
instructors try to overcome this issue by adopting textbooks that have online
course materials. More and more publishers are now beginning to provide online
courses for the hard copy textbooks that they market and many of these vendors
have contracted with BlackBoard, which offers the overall structure of an
academic web site and the mechanics of delivering it, leaving the course content
decisions to the instructors. So, as this movement gains momentum, more
research needs to be done as to how universities should handle the issue of
intellectual property rights.
Conclusion
There is no naysaying the fact that online education offers higher education to
those populations that are deprived of educational opportunities. As Rosenbaum
(2001) puts it, online learning “democratizes education” by placing resources of
prestigious universities with in the reach of those who would otherwise not have
access to it. But, whether it should replace traditional face-to-face instruction at
the undergraduate level at a public institution is debatable. However, introducing
undergraduates to online learning would serve them very well because online
learning serves as the back bone of continuing education and life long learning
and it is very likely that these students will enter a phase in their lives when they
have to renew their knowledge and skill. And so, to the question of “how can
technology be incorporated in the learning paradigm?” The answer, according to
this researcher, is to select a paradigm that blends the best in online learning and
face-to-face learning.
Students in this study visited their course-assisted web site in order to find useful
resources which could be accessed by user friendly software, to find opportunities to communicate electronically with their professor and classmates, to look
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Supplemental Web Sites: An Innovative Use of Information Technology 337
for opportunities to improve their academic performance and to “catch up” on
lost ground. Although, they did not all earn A’s, they saw the web site as a
valuable complement to their face-to-face lectures. Results in this study were
used to suggest design strategies that could assist in building richer web sites
which could eventually lead to a richer learning environment.
References
Angulo, A. J. and Bruce, M. (1999, Winter). Student perceptions of supplemental Web-based instruction. Innovative Higher Education, 24(2), 105-25.
Arbaugh, J. B. (2000, February). Virtual classroom characteristics and student
satisfaction with Internet-based MBA courses. Journal of Management
Education, 24(1), 32-54.
Atkinson, M. and Kydd, C. (1997). Individual characteristics associated with
World Wide Web use: An empirical study of playfulness and motivation.
The DATA BASE for advance in Information Systems, 28(2), 53-62.
Bagozzi, R. P., Davis, F. D. and Warshaw, P. R. (1992). Development and test
of a theory of technological learning and usage. Human Relations, 45(7),
659-686.
Bailey, R. A., Chow, W. C. and Haddad, M. K. (1999, January/February).
Continuous improvement in business education: Insights from the for-profit
sector and business school deans. Journal of Education for Business, 75,
165-180.
Bartlett, T. (1997, October). The hottest campus on the Internet. Business
Week, 3549, 77-80.
Brandon, D. P. and Hollingshead, A. B. (1999, April). Collaborative learning and
computer-supported groups. Communication Education, 48(2), 109-26.
The Campus Computing Project (1999). The Continuing Challenge of Instructional Integration and User Support. Encino, CA.
DeSanctis, G. and Sheppard, B. (1999). Bridging distance, time and culture in
executive MBA education. Journal of Education for Business, 157-160.
Eastman, J. K. and Swift, C. O. (2001). New horizons in distance education:
Online learner centered marketing class. Journal of Marketing Education, 23(1), 25-35.
Evans, C. and Fan, T. P. (2002). Life long learning through the virtual university.
Campus Wide Information Systems, 19(4), 127-134.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
338
Krishnamurthi
Evans, J. R. and Hasse, I. M. (2001). Online Business Education in the 21st
century: An analysis of potential target markets. Internet Research, 11(3),
246-260.
Everett, R. (1983). Diffusion of Innovations (3 rd Ed). New York: Free Press.
Everett, R. (1986). Communication Technology: The New Media in Society.
New York: Free Press.
Gefen, D. and Straub, D. W. (1997). Gender differences in the perception and
use of e-mail. An extension to the technology acceptance model. MIS
Quarterly, 21(4), 389-400.
Hartman, J., Lewis, J. S. and Powell, K. S. (2002). Inbox Shock: A study of
electronic message volume in distance managerial communication course.
Business Communication Quarterly, 65(3), 9-28.
Haworth, B. (1998). Do students benefit from course based web sites?
Meeting of Economic Association in Lexington, Kentucky.
Haworth, B. (1999, September/October). An analysis of the determinants of
students e-mail use. Journal of Education for Business, 75(1), 55-59.
Heines, R. A. and Hulse, D. B. (1996). Two way interactive television: An
emerging technology for university level business school instruction. Journal of Education for Business, 71(2), 74-76.
Hester, J. B. (1999, Spring). Using a Web-based interactive test as a learning
tool. Journalism and Mass Communication Education, 54(1), 35-41.
Kabat, E. J. and Friedel, J. (1990). The development, pilot testing, and
dissemination of a comprehensive evaluation model for assessing the
effectiveness of a two-way interactive distance learning systems.
(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. Ed 332 690).
Karuppan, C. and Karuppan, M. (1999, September). Empirically based guidelines for developing teaching materials on the Web. Business Communication Quarterly, 62(3), 37-45.
Kemelgor, B. H., Johnson, S. D. and Srinivasan, S. (2000, January/February).
Forces driving organizational change: A business school perspective.
Journal of Education for Business, 75(3), 133-37.
Kidder, L. H. and Judd, C. M. (1986). Research Methods in Social Relations
(5th Edition). Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
King, P. and Hildreth, D. (2000). Internet courses are they worth the effort?
Journal of Science Teaching, XXXI(2), 112-115.
Lahey, L. (2002). Virtual school drop-ins. Computing Canada, 28(20), 26-29.
Major online effort at MIT. (2001). Campus Wide Information Systems, 18(3),
99-100.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Supplemental Web Sites: An Innovative Use of Information Technology 339
Mangan, K. S. (1999, January). Top business schools seek to ride a bull market
in online MBAs. Chronicle of Higher Education, 45(19), A27-28.
McEwen, B. C. (2001). Web assisted and online learning. Business Communication Quarterly, 64(2), 98-103.
NEA (National Education Association) (2000, June). A Survey of Traditional
and Distance Learning Higher Education Members. Ed at a Distance.
Retrieved from the World Wide Web at: WWW.nea.org.
Okula, S. (1999, February). Going the distance: A new avenue for learning.
Business Education Forum, 53(3), 7-10.
Ponzurick, T. G., France, K. R and Logar, C. M. (2000). Delivering graduate
marketing education: An analysis of face to face versus distance education.
Marketing Education, 22(3), 180-188.
Rad, P. F. (2002). Distance education. Cost Engineering, 44(6), 9-11.
Ragothaman, S. and Hoadley, D. (1997, March/April). Integrating the Internet
and the World Wide Web into the business classroom: A synthesis. The
Journal of Education for Business, 72(4), 213-216.
Raymond III, F. B. (2000). Delivering distance education through technology: A
pioneer’s experience. Campus-Wide Information Systems, 17(2), 49-55.
Reisman, S., Dear, R. and Edge, D. (2001). Evolution of Web-based distance
learning strategies. The International Journal of Educational Management, 15(5), 245-251.
Rosenbaum, D. B. (2001, May). E-learning beckons busy professionals. Engineering News Review, 246(21), 38-42.
Schwartz, H. (1995). Computers and urban commuters in an introductory
literature class. In M. Collins and Z. L. Berge (Eds.), Computer Mediated
Communication and the Online Classroom (Vol. 2: Higher Education).
Slattery, M. J. (1998). Developing a Web-assisted class: An interview with
Mark Mitchell. Teaching of Psychology, 25(2), 152-155.
Surrency, D. P., Bishop, D. N. and Hendrix, E. H. (2001, Winter). The distance
learning composition classroom: Pedagogical and administrative concerns.
ADE Bulletin, 127, 55-59.
Webb, J. P. (2001). Technology: A tool for the learning environment. Campus
Wide Information Systems, 18(2), 73-78.
Witmer, D. F. (1998). Introduction to computer-mediated communication: A
master syllabus for teaching communication technology. Communication
Education, 47, 162-173.
World Bank: Major force in distance education. (2001). Campus Wide Information Systems, 18(2), 52-54.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
340 About the Authors
About the Authors
Caroline Howard has an M.B.A. from The Wharton School, University of
Pennsylvania, and a Ph.D. in Management Information Systems from the
University of California, Irvine. She is an associate professor at Touro
University and president of TechKnowledge-E Systems. Prior to Emory, she
was on the IT faculty at the University of Colorado, Colorado Springs. In addition
to also being an editor of The Design and Management of Effective Distance
Learning Programs (Idea Group Publishing, January 2002), Caroline recently
published Winning the Net Game: Becoming Profitable Now that the Web
Rules Have Changed (Entrepreneur Press, June 2002). She has written
numerous distance education and IT articles.
Karen Schenk holds a Ph.D. in Information Technology and an M.B.A. in
Finance from the University of California, Irvine. She has been a professor of
Information Systems at the University of Redlands, California, and at North
Carolina State University. She has taught numerous courses in information
technology, decision support systems, and systems design. Her publications
have focused on distance education, lifelong learning, and human-computer
interfaces. She has co-edited the book, The Design and Management of
Effective Distance Learning Programs (Idea Group Publishing, January
2002). She is currently senior partner of K. D. Schenk and Associates Consulting, working with companies and clients on IT issues and distance learning.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
About the Authors 341
Richard Discenza is a professor of Production Management and Information
Systems in the College of Business and Administration, University of Colorado
at Colorado Springs (USA). He received his B.S.F. in Forestry from Northern
Arizona University, an M.B.A. from Syracuse University, and a Ph.D. in
Management from University of Oklahoma. Dr. Discenza was formerly dean
of the college, where he helped establish and oversaw the development of the
distance M.B.A. program. His current research focuses on business process
reengineering, distance education, project management, and supply chain management. He has published numerous articles in professional and academic
journals and is a member of APICS, the Academy of Management, and PMI.
This is Dick’s second publication as an editor for Idea Group Publishing. In 2002,
he edited The Design and Management of Effective Distance Learning
Programs (IGP, January 2002).
*
*
*
Charles E. Beck is an associate professor of Management and Communication
at the University of Colorado at Colorado Springs, USA. As an Air Force officer,
his career began in aircraft maintenance, but included teaching at the Air Force
and Naval Academies, and the AF Institute of Technology. He began with the
University of Colorado as director of the MS in Technical Communication prior to
moving to business. Chuck has published in numerous journals and proceedings, and
Prentice-Hall published his book Managerial Communication: Bridging Theory
and Practice. He has served as a consultant to businesses in Dayton, Washington D.C., and in Colorado.
Judith V. Boettcher is a consultant and author in technology, instruction and
online learning. She has consulted with a wide range of major universities and
organizations on projects such as designing for learning, faculty development,
and future trends of uses of technology. In addition to consulting, Judith is
currently chairing the Syllabus 2003 conference and serving on the academic
advisory committee of ICUS, an e-learning company in Singapore. She can be
reached at judith@designingforlearning.info.
Elizabeth A. Buchanan is assistant professor and co-director of the Center for
Information Policy Research at the School of Information Studies, University of
Wisconsin-Milwaukee, USA. She researches, teaches, and writes in the areas
of distance education and online learning, information ethics, information policy,
and research ethics.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
342 About the Authors
Gregory Claeys is a Metis/Cree from central Canada and is an education
consultant for universities, colleges and first nation communities in British
Columbia. As a former student of the University of Victoria’s Administration of
Aboriginal Governments Program in the School of Public Administration, Greg’s
interests include bridging the gap between mainstream society and aboriginal
people by offering educational opportunities that bring different world views,
visions, values, beliefs and perspectives into the framework of educational
disciplines and creating opportunities for both aboriginal and non-aboriginal
people.
Kim E. Dooley is an associate professor in the Department of Agricultural
Education at Texas A&M University, USA. She has conducted numerous
professional presentations and training programs around the globe. Her publications include a chapter in Distance Training, which received the Wedemeyer
Award from the Association of Continuing Education. She has served on many
university/system committees and advisory boards, including the American
Distance Education Consortium International Taskforce. She was also the 1999
recipient of the Montague Teaching Scholar Award and the 2002 International
Excellence Award at Texas A&M University. She is an active member of the
American Association of Agriculture Education (AAAE) and the Association
for International Agricultural and Extension Education. She received the
Outstanding Young Member Award for the Southern Region of AAAE in 2002
and has won the Outstanding Paper Presentation three times (National, 2000,
Western Region, 2000, and Southern Region, 2003). She also serves on the
editorial board for the Journal of Agricultural Education.
Jonathan Frank is an associate professor of Information Systems and Operations Management, Sawyer School of Management, Suffolk University, Boston,
USA. He received his Ph.D. from the University of Strathclyde in Glasogow,
UK, in 1978. He has taught courses and led workshops on e-commerce
development and Web design at universities in Europe, Canada, the US, Africa
and the South Pacific. His current research focuses on the management of
cross-cultural virtual teams. He has published in the management information
systems and distance education fields.
Svenja Hagenhoff, Ph.D., born July 11,1971 in Muenster, Germany, worked
after getting her German high school degree in the Electrochemical Industry as
a commercial clerk from 1991 to 1992. From 1992 -1997 she studied Business
Economics at the Georg-August-University Goettingen, Germany. Along the
way she did some practical trainings at Deutsche Welle TV in the editorial
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
About the Authors 343
offices and at Hoechst (today, Aventis) in controlling and computer engineering.
From 1997-2002 she worked as a research assistant at the chair of Information
Management, Dept. 2 at the Georg-August-University Göttingen, Germany. She
did projects at the areas of e-learning and information technology in financial
services. In addition, she holds a teaching position at the Leibniz-Akademie
Hannover, Germany, where she taught information management from 19972001. In 2001 she received her Ph.D. (Dr. rer. pol.). Since September 2002, she
has served as scientific assistant and leader of two research teams at the chair
of Information Management at the University of Goettingen in order to get the
venia legendi (Habilitation). Her research interests are innovation management
and knowledge and education management.
Oliver Kamin, Dipl.-Hdl., born May 12, 1971, in Gronau, Germany, received his
German High School degree and his professional training from 1991-1993 as an
industrial clerk at Deutsche Tiefbohr-AG in Bad Bentheim, Germany. Afterwards he did his military-service. From 1994-1997, he studied business economics at the Justus-Liebig-University, Gießen, Germany. After his diploma preliminary test, he changed to the Georg-August University, Göttingen, Germany, to
continue his academic formation in econonomics and business education. After
getting his diploma, he worked at the Institute for Economics and Business
Education at the Georg-August-University, Göttingen, Germany. Since 2001, he
has worked as a research assistant at the Institute of Information Systems, Dept.
II, at the Georg-August-University, Göttingen, Germany.
Michaela Knust, Dipl.-Hdl., born February 15, 1972, in Lower Saxony,
Germany, completed her vocational training as industrial clerk in 1994 at H.
Butting GmbH & Co. KG, Wittingen, Germany. Afterwards, she was working
for two years as commercial clerk at the Export Sales of H. Butting GmbH &
Co. KG. From 1996-2001 she studied Business Education at the Georg-August
University in Göttingen, Germany. In 1998, she did her three-month-practical
training at United Pipelines Ltd., in Warrington, UK, during the semester break.
Since 2002 she has worked as a member of the education network WINFOLine
and is completing her doctorate in economics at the chair of Information
Management, Dept. 2 at the Georg-August University, Göttingen, Germany.
Malini Krishnamurthi, Ph.D., is a lecturer in Information Systems and
Decision Sciences at the California State University, Fullerton, California, USA,
where she teaches undergraduate and graduate courses in database design and
programming with Oracle, systems analysis and design, data warehousing and
knowledge management. Her research interests include organizational impacts
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
344 About the Authors
of IT, strategic value of IT and the IS curriculum. She has been a reviewer and
contributor to several conference proceedings and professional journals.
Yai Levy is instructor of Information Systems and Director of Online Learning
at the College of Business Administration at Florida International University,
USA. Prior to joining the college, he assisted NASA in developing e-learning
platforms and management of Internet and Web infrastructures. Yair is a Ph.D.
candidate in MIS at FIU and is finishing his dissertation in the area of online
learning systems. He earned his bachelor’s degree in Aerospace Engineering
from the Technion (Israel Institute of Technology). He has received his M.B.A.
with an MIS concentration from FIU. His current research interests include
value of information systems, value of online learning systems, IS and online
learning effectiveness. He served as a referee research reviewer for several
international scientific journals and conferences (AMC-SIGMIS, ICIS, HICSS,
AMCIS, and ICPAKM). Yair’s teaching interests and courses taught include:
telecommunications and networking, Web management, and e-commerce technologies for managers in the Master of Science in MIS program and for
undergraduate MIS majors.
James R. Lindner is an assistant professor in the Department of Agricultural
Education at Texas A&M University, USA. He has authored or co-authored
more than 100 refereed research papers and two textbooks. His research
focuses on planning and needs assessment, management of human resources,
and distance education. His article “Understanding Employee Motivation” was
named the most frequently viewed Journal of Extension article. Within the
department, Dr. Lindner is helping to develop and deliver the Masters of
Agriculture at a distance program and the Doc @ Distance program. He has
received numerous honors and awards for presentations of research findings at
international and national conferences and was recently named the Outstanding
Young Agricultural Educator by the American Association for Agricultural
Education.
Wm. Benjamin Martz, Jr., is an associate professor of Information Systems
at the University of Colorado at Colorado Springs (USA). Ben’s teaching
interests include e-business, software development, groupware and team-based
problem solving. He received his B.B.A. in Marketing from the College of
William and Mary and his M.S. in Management Information Systems (MIS) and
his Ph.D. in Business, with an emphasis in MIS, from the University of Arizona.
Ben was one of the founding members, as well as president and COO, of
Ventana Corporation — a technology, spin-off firm from the University of
Arizona — incorporated to commercialize the groupware software product
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
About the Authors 345
GroupSystems. In 1994, GroupSystems won PC Magazine’s Editor’s Choice
award for best Electronic Meeting System software. Ben has published his
groupware research in MIS Quarterly, Decision Support Systems, and the
Journal of Management Information Systems and his student learning environment research in the Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education,
Journal of Cooperative Education and Journal of Computer Information
Systems.
Michelle Ramim is an MIS consultant helping corporations and educational
institutions on varieties of Information System implementations including new ecommerce and online learning platforms. Michelle previously served as the
Director of the Instructional Technology Center at Florida Memorial College in
Miami, Florida. She has extensive experience in consulting. Michelle directed the
development and implementations of several Information Systems, including
promotional and interactive web sites, and online learning web sites for several
educational institutions utilizing WebCT, and other online learning platforms. She
is currently admitted to a Ph.D. program in Information Systems at Nova
Southeastern University. Michelle is a frequent speaker at national and international meetings on management information systems and online learning topics.
She earned her bachelor’s degree from Barry University in Miami, Florida.
Michelle has received her M.B.A. from Florida International University.
Venkateshwar K. Reddy is the associate dean and an associate professor of
Finance at the University of Colorado at Colorado Springs, USA. Dr. Reddy
received his master’s and doctorate degrees from the Pennsylvania State
University. Dr. Reddy’s interest and efforts led to building a state of the art,
nationally ranked Distance M.B.A. program at the University of Colorado at
Colorado Springs. The program averages more than 1,000 enrollments per year
up from less than 500 when Dr. Reddy took over the program. Dr. Reddy also
teaches in the CU’s Executive M.B.A. program, which attracts mid- to highlevel managers, entrepreneurs, and doctors among other professions. Twice, he
has received the Outstanding Teacher Award from the College of Business for
his teaching efforts. Professor Reddy’s primary research and teaching interests
are in the areas of investments and corporate finance. Dr. Reddy’s research
work has appeared in several finance and economics journals. His work on
mutual fund investing strategies, published in the Journal of Financial Planning this year, has been quoted in the New York Times and other newspapers
and major magazines around the country.
Lance J. Richards joined the Department of Petroleum Engineering at Texas
A&M University (USA) in August 2002 as a Distance Learning Coordinator.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
346 About the Authors
He received a B.S. degree in Agricultural Education from Texas A&M
University in December 2001 and will complete an M.S. in Agricultural Education at Texas A&M University in December 2003. He is also certified to teach
in the state of Texas. Lance’s background is in teaching, educational theory,
instructional design, the management of instructional telecommunication systems, planning and needs assessment, and in the delivery of instruction at a
distance. His research includes comparisons of distance delivery methods, the
application of new technology to distance programs, course design principles for
distance education, needs assessment for programs seeking to offer distance
education, and the evaluation of existing distance degree programs.
Evan T. Robinson, R.Ph., Ph.D., director, Division of Technology in Education,
associate professor, Department of Biopharmaceutical Sciences, Shenandoah
University School of Pharmacy. Evan received his B.S. degree in Pharmacy and
M.S. in Pharmacy Administration from St. Louis College of Pharmacy. He
received his Ph.D. in Pharmacy Administration from Auburn University, the
Department of Pharmacy Care Systems. Since joining Shenandoah University
his responsibilities have included: overseeing an Internet-based, non-traditional
doctor of pharmacy program started in September 1998 with a steady-state
enrollment of 120 students and 175 graduates; evaluating onsite and offsite
applications of technology for teaching and learning; the development and
administration of certificate and continuing pharmaceutical education programs
and teaching within the school of pharmacy.
Richard Ryan is an associate professor at the University of Oklahoma in the
College of Architecture Construction Science Division (USA). He has been
actively involved in teaching and using information technology for construction
applications since 1992. He has done Web development and technology consulting for construction companies. In Spring 1998, he offered the first complete
semester length online construction class (cns4913online, Construction Equipment and Methods) to other construction programs. His experiences have
fostered many observations pertaining to creation, organization, promotion and
administration of web-based distance learning. Currently, he is working with
continuing education at the University of Oklahoma to host a construction
administration online portal to be purchased by students. The portal will offer a
study guide, links and related activities.
Gilly Salmon is an academic member of the Centre for Innovation, Knowledge
and Enterprise at the Open University Business School and Visiting Professor
at Glasgow Caledonian Business School, both in the UK. She chairs the
OUBS’s large online Professional Certificate in Management. She has been
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
About the Authors 347
involved in online teaching and learning since the 1980s. She has two research
degrees — one in Change Management and one in E-training (she says she needs
both in the e-world!). Her recent books are called E-tivities and E-moderating.
Web sites: http://www.atimod.com/presentations, http://www.atimod.com/emoderating, http://www.e-tivities.com.
Karen Sangermano is the program manager for the University of Colorado
(USA) - Colorado Springs (UCCS) Distance MBA program. She has worked
with the UCCS Distance M.B.A. from its inception and coordinates many of the
day-to-day functions of the program, including discussions with the students
about their impressions of the course and the overall program. Karen holds a
B.S.B.A. in Accounting from CU-Colorado Springs.
Gary R. Schornack is a faculty member and director of mentorship programs
at the University of Colorado’s Denver Business School (USA). Gary is a
frequent speaker and author of more than 40 papers in the past three years. His
national and international presentations have included a variety of topics:
marketing competition, communications strategies, distance education, mentorship,
and knowledge management. As a marketing and management consultant, he
has worked with many companies including: Coors Brewing Co., Qwest, and the
U.S. Office of Education. His web site received the Golden Web Award four
years in a row for one of the best in the nation.
Morgan M. Shepherd is an associate professor of Information Systems at the
University of Colorado at Colorado Springs, USA. Morgan spent 10 years in
industry, most of that time with IBM. His last position with IBM was as a
technical network designer. He earned his Ph.D. from the University of Arizona
in 1995 and has been teaching for the I/S department at the University of
Colorado in Colorado Springs since then. His primary teaching emphasis is in
telecommunications at the graduate and undergraduate level. He has also taught
numerous courses on computer literacy, web design and systems analysis and
design. In addition, he has been teaching courses via distance education for
several years. His primary research emphasis is on making distributed groups
productive and applying this research to business as well as education. His
research has appeared in the Journal of Management Information Systems,
Informatica, and Journal of Computer Information Systems.
Janet Toland is a lecturer in Information Systems at Victoria University of
Wellington. She has 20 years experience in the field of IS, both in industry, and
as an academic. She has worked in the UK, Botswana, Fiji and New Zealand.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
348 About the Authors
Her areas of research are systems analysis and design, virtual organizations, the
virtual university, computer mediated communication, the digital divide and
computer supported co-operative work. She is currently investigating the
opportunities for e-commerce in the South Pacific, and the development of
learning regions in New Zealand.
Murray Turoff is a distinguished professor of Information Systems at the New
Jersey Institute of Technology, USA, and holder of the research chair for the
Hurlburt Professor of Management Information Systems. Dr. Turoff has been
involved in research, development, and evaluation of computer mediated communication systems since the late ’60s. Since the early ’80s he has been
utilizing group-oriented communication systems to augment college courses and
for offering distance versions of college level courses. He is a noted advocate
for the use of modern group communications technology and appropriate
learning methodologies for improving the quality of education at all levels.
Elizabeth Wellburn works as an instructional designer at Royal Roads University in Victoria, British Columbia, Canada. Her background includes projects
involving design, development, implementation and research related to technology for education and training. She has worked in corporate, government and
academic contexts and is an experienced facilitator of distributed learning
courses. Elizabeth’s enthusiasm for technology as an educational tool is based
on a vision of sustainability and capacity building through enhanced collaboration.
She believes that this is possible both within and across communities of learning
through consultation and the active participation of community members.
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Index 349
Index
A
C
academic courses 5
action based e-moderator training 70
adult learning principles 107
advanced methods 100
anonymity 8
anti-globalization concerns 81
assessment strategies 110
assimilation 89
asynchronous group communication
technologies 2
audit analysis 259
automated construction teaching 240
automated format 236
Central Queensland University (CQU)
218
certificate design 23
classroom interaction 153
co-operational partners 303
collectivist cultures 215
college curriculum 322
commercialization 146
communication protocol 8
community-based distributed learning
79
competency-based course 100
computer-based trainings (CBT) 191
computer-mediated communication 215
computer-mediated system 2
congruency 21
content facilitator 58
content-specific modules 197
copyright costs 256
corporate education 264
cost-oriented 302
course calendar 103
B
Blackboard 102
budget 285
business-to-business (B2B) models
256
business-to-consumer (B2C) transactions 256
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
350 Index
course content 103
course design 23
course management tool 102
course orientation 103
course planning 100
course syllabus 103
cultural background 215
cultural differences 213
cultural diversity 214
curriculum design 23
D
degree design 23
development team 288
didactical guidelines 191
distance education 119, 144, 178
distance education administration 154
distance education classes 1
distance education materials 253
distance learning 2, 213
distance learning strategies 324
distributed learning opportunities 79
E
e-learning 120, 190
e-learning materials 190
e-mail 213
e-moderating 55
e-moderator 56
e-moderator training 62
e-store 237
education industry 145
education networks 302
education service providers 303
educational consumerism 13
educational environment changes 147
educational integration 127
educational process model 120, 122
educational technology 213
efficiency of teaching 1
electronic transcripts 2
F
face-to face learning 164
face-to-face classroom 1
face-to-face courses 1, 323
faculty 6
faculty development costs 255
faculty instruction costs 256
financial incentive 237
funding 285
funding crises 282
futures project 83
G
game approach 238
globalization and educational change
82
globalization and social change 82
globalized world 79
glocalization 86
group work 170
H
higher education 55, 163, 303
I
implementation approach 199
Indigenous communities 80
Indigenous pilot projects 87
individualist cultures 215
information and communication technologies (ICT) 281
information exchange 66
information management 305
information overload 9
information technologies 79
infrastructure design 23
input synergies 304
institutional design 23
institutional support 285
instructional delivery 322
instructional design 100, 236
instructor-based system 237
inter-university education network 302
interactive teaching 105
internal audit 258
Internet 236
Internet testing 177
Internet-based learning 302
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
Index 351
J
journals 168
K
knowledge construction 67
knowledge transfer 219
L
learner-centered 100
learning curve effects 312
learning platform supplier 310
learning processes 56
learning support 113
M
organizational education networks 306
output synergies 304
P
participation 167
pedagogy 132
peer-assessment 170
performance-based learning 236
phase-oriented approach 199
pilot program 290
portfolios 168
process facilitator 58
process optimizing 312
process synergies 304
production costs 255
program design 23
market analysis 309
market stratification 260
market-oriented 302
membership status lists 8
modular Web-based teaching 190
motivation 64
Q
N
recurrent costs 255
return on investment 253
role control 8
National Education Association (NEA)
325
new money 237
O
online assessment strategies 166
online conference 8
online course 57
online course design principles 99
online development 62
online educational content 253
online environments 165
online instruction 236
online learning 21, 100, 278
online meeting 172
online orientation 112
online socialisation 65
online students 163, 182
online teaching 56
online text-based discussion 56
quality of instruction 1
quasi-experimental studies 3
R
S
scaffolding 62
scaling methods 9
self-assessment 169
self-directed learning 108
self-funding online learning program 279
site map 103
smart classroom 120
social construction model 220
social informatics 179
social pressures 4
South Pacific 213
stimulating learning 238
student assessment design 23
student-centered learning 108
student-centered system 237
support costs 256
synergy effects 304
system-specific modules 197
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
352 Index
T
technological infrastructure 146
technologist 58
technology costs 255
technology training 112
technology-enhanced global education
84
teleteaching 302
test performance 328
transformative income generation 257
U
UK Open University 57
unit and learning activity design 23
University of the South Pacific (USP)
218
user-friendliness 326
V
virtual classroom 119
virtual universities 302
voting 9
Vygotskian theory of cognition 21
W
Web course tools 102
Web-based coursework 164
Web-based instruction 323
Web-based trainings (WBT) 191, 303
WebCT 102
WINFOLine 202, 303
Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.
NEW Titles
from Information Science Publishing
• Instructional Design in the Real World: A View from the Trenches
Anne-Marie Armstrong
ISBN: 1-59140-150-X: eISBN 1-59140-151-8, © 2004
• Personal Web Usage in the Workplace: A Guide to Effective
Human Resources Management
Murugan Anandarajan & Claire Simmers
ISBN: 1-59140-148-8; eISBN 1-59140-149-6, © 2004
• Social, Ethical and Policy Implications of Information Technology
Linda L. Brennan & Victoria Johnson
ISBN: 1-59140-168-2; eISBN 1-59140-169-0, © 2004
• Readings in Virtual Research Ethics: Issues and Controversies
Elizabeth A. Buchanan
ISBN: 1-59140-152-6; eISBN 1-59140-153-4, © 2004
• E-ffective Writing for e-Learning Environments
Katy Campbell
ISBN: 1-59140-124-0; eISBN 1-59140-125-9, © 2004
• Development and Management of Virtual Schools: Issues and
Trends
Catherine Cavanaugh
ISBN: 1-59140-154-2; eISBN 1-59140-155-0, © 2004
• The Distance Education Evolution: Issues and Case Studies
Dominique Monolescu, Catherine Schifter & Linda Greenwood
ISBN: 1-59140-120-8; eISBN 1-59140-121-6, © 2004
• Distance Learning and University Effectiveness: Changing Educational
Paradigms for Online Learning
Caroline Howard, Karen Schenk & Richard Discenza
ISBN: 1-59140-178-X; eISBN 1-59140-179-8, © 2004
• Managing Psychological Factors in Information Systems Work: An Orientation
to Emotional Intelligence
Eugene Kaluzniacky
ISBN: 1-59140-198-4; eISBN 1-59140-199-2, © 2004
• Developing an Online Curriculum: Technologies and Techniques
Lynnette R. Porter
ISBN: 1-59140-136-4; eISBN 1-59140-137-2, © 2004
• Online Collaborative Learning: Theory and Practice
Tim S. Roberts
ISBN: 1-59140-174-7; eISBN 1-59140-175-5, © 2004
Excellent additions to your institution’s library! Recommend these titles to your librarian!
To receive a copy of the Idea Group Inc. catalog, please contact 1/717-533-8845,
fax 1/717-533-8661,or visit the IGI Online Bookstore at:
http://www.idea-group.com!
Note: All IGI books are also available as ebooks on netlibrary.com as well as
other ebook sources. Contact Ms. Carrie Skovrinskie at <cskovrinskie@ideagroup.com> to receive a complete list of sources where you can obtain ebook
information or IGP titles.
30-Day
free trial!
InfoSci-Online
Database
www.infosci-online.com
Provide instant access to the latest offerings of Idea Group Inc. publications in the
fields of INFORMATION SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY and MANAGEMENT
During the past decade, with the advent of
telecommunications and the availability of
distance learning opportunities, more college and
university libraries can now provide access to
comprehensive collections of research literature
through access to online databases.
The InfoSci-Online database is the most
comprehensive collection of full-text literature
regarding research, trends, technologies, and
challenges in the fields of information science,
technology and management. This online
database consists of over 3000 book chapters,
200+ journal articles, 200+ case studies and over
1,000+ conference proceedings papers from
IGI’s three imprints (Idea Group Publishing, Information Science Publishing and IRM Press) that
can be accessed by users of this database through identifying areas of research interest and keywords.
Contents & Latest Additions:
Unlike the delay that readers face when waiting for the release of print publications, users will find
this online database updated as soon as the material becomes available for distribution, providing
instant access to the latest literature and research findings published by Idea Group Inc. in the field
of information science and technology, in which emerging technologies and innovations are
constantly taking place, and where time is of the essence.
The content within this database will be updated by IGI with 1300 new book chapters, 250+ journal
articles and case studies and 250+ conference proceedings papers per year, all related to aspects of
information, science, technology and management, published by Idea Group Inc. The updates will
occur as soon as the material becomes available, even before the publications are sent to print.
InfoSci-Online pricing flexibility allows this database to be an excellent addition to your library,
regardless of the size of your institution.
Contact: Ms. Carrie Skovrinskie, InfoSci-Online Project Coordinator, 717-533-8845
(Ext. 14), cskovrinskie@idea-group.com for a 30-day trial subscription to InfoSci-Online.
A product of:
INFORMATION SCIENCE PUBLISHING*
Enhancing Knowledge Through Information Science
http://www.info-sci-pub.com
*an imprint of Idea Group Inc.
Just Released!
Web-Based Education:
Learning from Experience
Anil Aggarwal
University of Baltimore, USA
During the past two decades, telecommunications and
Web-enabled technologies have combined to create a
new field of knowledge known as “Web-Based
Learning and Teaching Technologies.” The main
objective of Web-Based Education: Learning from
Experience is to learn from faculty experiences
gained while implementing and utilizing these
technologies. The book addresses many trends and
issues associated with Web-Based Education, and
explores the opportunities and problems confronting
colleges and universities to effectively utilize and
manage Web-Based Education in their teaching environments.
ISBN 1-59140-102-X(h/c); eISBN 1-59140-110-0 • Price: US $74.95 • 350 pages • © 2003
“It is crucial for educators and trainers to continually enhance their
understanding of the issues, challenges and opportunities of ‘Web-Based
Learning’, and to recognize the impact of WBE on educational systems,
programs and professions.”
–Anil Aggarwal, University of Baltimore, USA
It’s Easy to Order! Order online at www.idea-group.com
or call 717/533-8845 x10!
Mon-Fri 8:30 am-5:00 pm (est) or fax 24 hours a day 717/533-8661
Information Science Publishing
Hershey • London • Melbourne • Singapore
An excellent addition to your library
The Design and Management
of Effective Distance Learning
Programs
Richard Discenza , University of Colorado
Caroline Howard, Emory University
Karen Schenk , K.D. Schenk and Associates Consulting
“Anytime, anyplace, and any subject” is an emerging
theme for distance learning in higher education
through out the world. Portable wireless devices and
other emerging interactive media are giving traditional
classroom and distance education professors a
growing array of tools to provide instruction wherever
it is needed or desired. Many predict that within the
next year handheld devices and virtual classrooms will
be ubiquitous, enabling students to log on to the
Internet for assignments and to participate in chat
room discussions with students across the globe.
The purpose of The Design and Management of
Effective Distance Learning Programs is to increase understanding of the major
issues, challenges and solutions related to remote education. It provides the
theoretical and practical knowledge of the distance education field as it currently
exists in the 21st century. It addresses the technological, institutional, faculty,
student and pedagogical perspectives concerning the field of distance education.
ISBN 1-930708-20-3 (h/c)• eISBN 1-59140-001-5 • US$74.95
• 312 pages • Copyright © 2002
“With such large numbers of individuals learning at a distance from traditional
educational facilities, it is critical that we understand the impacts of these
arrangements, the major issues and challenges, and how to best manage
distance education.”
–Richard Discenza, University of Colorado, USA
It’s Easy to Order! Order online at www.idea-group.com
or call 717/533-8845 x10!
Mon-Fri 8:30 am-5:00 pm (est) or fax 24 hours a day 717/533-8661
Idea Group Publishing
Hershey • London • Melbourne • Singapore
An excellent addition to your library