Otto Peters

The iceberg has not yet melted

Further reflections on the concept of industrialization and distance teaching (1989) in: Otto Peters on Distance Education: The Industrialization of Teaching and Learning, edited by Desmond Keegan, Routledge Studies in Distance Education, London / New York, 1994, pp. 195 - 209

After his retirement as ViceChancellor, Peters published this article on his views on the industrialization of teaching and learning in 1989 in the journal Open Learning. The striking title and vigorous refutation of his critics shows his new skill in writing in English. He gives his reactions to a selection of reviewers and commentators on his work, mainly taken from English sources.

When reviewing my book Die didaktische Struktur des Fernunterrichts. Untersuchungen zu einer industrialisierten Form des Lehrens und Lernens (1973) (The educational principles of distance education: research into an industrialized form of teaching and learning), Jeavons (1986:165) used a striking metaphor when saying that 'theories are like icebergs' in order to point out that quite often only one part of the visible tip becomes known whereas the submergent ninetenths remain invisible. With the help of this metaphor he wanted to explain that only one chapter of the book on the comparison between the teaching and learning process in distance study and the industrial production process had become visible and was hence being discussed, whereas four more chapters containing the theoretical underpinnings remained in the dark, partly because they have not been translated into English. This could be the reason for the existence of a number of misunderstandings. Being invited to respond to such misunderstandings I would like to adopt this metaphor. I consider it to be well chosen for three additional reasons.

First: Icebergs break away from their original surroundings and often drift into new areas where they do not normally belong. The use of characteristics relating to the industrial production process in explaining the teachinglearning process in distance study was certainly new and unheard of, and in the minds of some not even appropriate or desirable.

Second: Icebergs are often seen as a danger. Many readers when they come across the term 'industrialized teaching and learning' think of smoking chimneys and dirty manufacturing plants and become afraid that these will soil the pure world of learning. Also at a more abstract level, people have strong reservations as they feel that something entirely unfamiliar and dangerous has entered education.

Third: Icebergs change their appearance and become smaller. Jeavons (1986:168) referred to this aspect when he wrote that 'even the finest icebergs can melt'.

MISUNDERSTANDING 1

I must be a proponent of the process of industrialization in the field of distance education, because I have described the process in defail and at length, and I must be trying to bring about and further this process

Nothing could be more wrong. This reminds me of the oriental potentates who put the blame for unpleasant news on the messenger and had him hanged. I have not advocated the industrialization of teaching and learning. It was only that I drew attention to this developmenent which nobody had seen until then, and tried to analyse it. I acted as a witness. Most importantly of all, I am not opposed to other forms of teaching and learning, and especially not to facetoface elements or other forms of the 'guided didactic conversation' (Holmberg. 1981: 30) in distance study. I do not want to dehumanize the instructional process in distance learning.

In fact, the case is quite the contrary. In order to prove this I have to refer to an invisible part of the iceberg. In my book I devoted a chapter to the problematic nature of industrialized forms of teaching and learning. I discussed the structural incompatibility of industrialized teaching and learning with a locally organized educational system. Furthermore, I stressed the process of alienation which takes place when students are confronted with technical artefacts instead of live human beings. Personal relations become indirect and depersonalized, and lose much of their reality. This is symptomatic of the great rationalization of society which is going on irresistibly and which leads to 'disenchantment with the world' (Max Weber 1951: 566). Finally, I suggested that dominant political groups might easily seize power by increasing their influence not only in the administration, industry, military, and the transport and communications systems, but also through a centralized industrialized system of education. Such a system would fit easily within an interrelated and integrated megaorganization, and could be used to manipulate people in a subtle but efficient way. There is the danger that people would become more and more instrumentalized in such a system (Peters 1973: 208).

MISUNDERSTANDING 2

As I have made a study of the similarities of distance study and educational technology I must be an ed tech fan. Jeavons (1986: 166) called me 'a great technological optimist'. Schwittmann (1982:155) is worried and calls my description 'very problematic'. Ehmann (1981: 231) goes so far as to mistake me for a member of the Society for Programmed Instruction (Gesellschaft für Programmierten Unterricht), which I have never been.

Nothing could be more absurd. Of course, I studied the rise of educational technology in the seventies with great interest. This was part of my job. Certainly, I described the rightly significant role it had in the proeess of industrialization in edueation. However, I have never been a protagonist of educational technology. On the contrary, I devoted a chapter to a description of the dangers of a technological model of distance study; the overemphasis on technical devices, the inevitable reduction of possible learning objectives, the fragmentation and compartmentalization of the learning process, the dominance of technical rationality at the cost of 'critical rationality'. Obviously this part of my book is also part of the hidden iceberg.

Perhaps I should repeat what has been said again and again, perhaps most recently by Shale (1987: 1521); educational technologies have not worked in distance teaching universities as their more enthusiastic proponents initially thought they would, notwithstanding the theoretical and empirical accomplishments of the last two decades (see, for instance, the massive volumes by Romiszowski 1981, 1984, 1986, 1988). The reasons for this are manifold:

The skills and techniques of educational technology have been too complex and timeconsuming to be acquired by academics in addition to their teaching and research duties.

The idea that experts in educational technology should assume a mediating function and impart their expertise to academics individually or in course teams has only been partly realized.

The patterns and routines of disciplinebased traditional teaching proved to be very strong, and these have not been replaced hy the artificial procedures of instructional design (for example, the definition of learning objectives in operational terms, the construction of tests, the identification of learning strategies, and the planning of evaluation measures).

Obviously the staying power of traditional ways of teaching has been underrated.

On the other hand it would be wrong to say that academic teaching at distance teaching universities has remained unscathed by educational technology. We can register at least the following changes: academics have learnt to plan and to prepare their teaching material carefully and well in advance of delivery. They have assumed an experimental attitude with regard to their own instruction. They have become used to looking at their courses as 'products', which can be improved with the help of relevant data. They have allowed experts to discuss problems of teaching with them, individually or in course teams. They have used mass media and have transformed their instruction according to the requirements of those media, and have enjoyed the fact that they can reach out to thousands of students at one time. They have learnt to use some of the educational technology jargon. On the whole, there is no doubt about it: this part of the iceberg has melted considerably.

MISUNDERSTANDING 3

The interpretation of distance study as an industrialized form of teaching and learning was part of the zeitgeist which prevailed in the formative years of the first open universities (Stale 7987: 15). It might have been justified in the seventies but after the disillusionment of the eighties it has lost much of its relevance (Ehmann (1981: 233), Jeavons (1986: 165)).

I do not see it this way. The industrialization of teachhing and learning is only a small part of a pattern of enormous social change. Industrialization has changed and will go on changing our lives fundamentally whether we like it or not: people now work, spend their leisure time, buy, eat and communicate with their relatives and friends in different ways. They also think in different ways and have developed attitudes not known by their grandparents. It is unlikely that education can resist this process. Further, it might be misleading to assume that the technologization of education peaked in the seventies.

We will probably have to face even greater changes of this kind in education if we are seriously to strive for egalitarian educational systems. In the same way as it will not be possible to feed, clothe and house nearly everyone in the developing countries properly without industrialization, so it will not be possible to provide education. The industrialization of education represents a longterm process of historical and anthropological dimensions and not just the consequences of a decade of enthusiastic reform. I dealt with this in Chapter 5 of my book, yet this is almost forgotten in the debate about the 'industrial model' of distance study, the only exceptions to this oversight being found in the work of Bååth (1979: 7; 1981: 212), Keegan (1986: 85), and Rekkedal (1983: 79).

MISUNDERSTANDING 4

The concept of industrialized teaching and learning is more or less typical for single mode distance teaching universities (namely, those teaching only at a distance), but not for dual mode institutions (that is, those teaching both traditionally by facetoface methods and also at a distance). The issue now is singlemode (industrialized) versus dualmode institutions. Furthermore, 'the supremacy' of the singlemode institutions 'is challenged' (Jeavons (1986: 167)).

Dualmode and singlemode institutions differ in their application of the principles of industrialization only relatively. Dualmode institutions also have to develop learning materials, in Deakin, for example, using the selfsame course team approach (division of labour, collaboration of experts, longrange planning, financial investment). They have to duplicate and despatch them using machines and technical media (mechanization) and often they have to keep track of their students with the help of a computer (automation). They cannot, however, exploit the advantages of mass production and capitalize on the economics of the largescale operation which enables singlemode distance teaching institutions to employ the best teachers and experts in the market.

To sum up, dualmode institutions are partly industrialized. They are somewhere on a continuum between conventional facetoface teaching and learning and the instruction of singlemode institutions.

MISUNDERSTANDING 5

By identifying the characteristics of industrial production processes in distance education I have developed a 'theory of distance education' (Rebel (1983: 175)).

I did not do this! I limited myself to describing the structural differences between traditional teaching and learning and distance study. In spite of this, distance teaching remains teaching and distance education remains education. Both forms remain, of course, the object of the current theories of instruction and education. Distance study, therefore, can be analysed and interpreted according to the teaching models of scholars such as Skinner, Rothkopf, Ausubel, Egan, Bruner and Rogers, as Bååth (1983: 76) has shown so convincingly. It can be developed with the help of didactic concepts like, for instance, 'independent study', 'open learning', 'contract learning' or 'video tutored instruction'. I never maintained that my characterization of the structure of distance study could or should replace them. Its industrial structure is just one aspect of the phenomenon which has to be taken into account.

It is true, that, in 1973, I referred to Paul Heimann who had envisaged the emergence of a 'new didactics' because of the growing importance of technical media in instruction, and it may be that I shared this idea and hoped to contribute to it. But I never called my 'comparative interpretation' a theory.

This being so it is, of course, pointless to refer to the criteria which a theory of instruction must meet as described by other authors and to measure my comparative interpretation against them (Holmberg 1985: 25).

MISUNDERSTANDING 6

In distance teaching universities there are two areas. One is industrialized namely the collection, production, storage and distribution of teaching material (here the university functions like a business enterprise); while the other is not, it is 'more in the nature of traditionally conceived academic areas' (Kaye 1985:1432, 1436; Kaye and Rumble 1981:179).

This is certainly not the whole truth. In fact, I did not limit my comparison of the teaching and learning process of distance education and industrialized forms of work to the obvious factory or business enterprise areas of distance teaching universities but extended it (and this is more important), to the actual teaching and learning. In order to illustrate this by an example I shall refer here to the most striking feature of this development. Traditionally, a professor performed many teaching functions. He or she prepared, invited the students to meet in a lecture room or at home, created a special learning atmosphere, and motivated the students, implicitly or explicitly. The professor transmitted knowledge to the students, using voice and body as media, and decided when and how to use the blackboard or other media. The professor initiated and took part in the didactic dialogues, acted as tutor and counsellor, examined the students and selected students to help in research.

Due to the application of the principle of division of labour, and the cooperation of specialized experts, the personal unity of all these activities is broken up and the functions mentioned are assigned to specialists, groups of specialists or even specialized sections. By so doing, the role of the traditional professor is reduced mainly to the function of a subjectmatter specialist, as members of the course team relieve him or her of many tasks of instructional planning. Media specialists, evaluation experts and instructional designers might be involved. Tutors and counsellors are involved at a distance in study centres. A bureaucratic organization coordinates the many separated teaching functions. Most phases of the teachinglearning process take place without the professor's intervention.

The parallel development in the world of work is obvious. The craftworker planned, organized, worked with tools and sold the products him or herself. In the industrialized working process this unity of action is divided into many specialized functions in departments for research and development, production, marketing, sales and so on.

As this radical change in instructional method corresponds naturally with a change in learning behaviour, it is appropriate to apply the term 'industrialized' to both teaching and learning in distance education.

What about research? Is it not organized in the same way as in traditional universities? Yes, but if we take a closer look at it we see that even in traditional universities, especially in the natural sciences and technological disciplines, the process of research has assumed the characteristics of industrialized work processes and takes place in organizations which are similar to factories. Helmut Schelsky (1963: 192) has described this, quoting Max Weber, who pointed to the division of labour in this field back in 1919: 'Research becomes a continuous acquisition of knowledge, a production process, which must devalue the single contribution' ( 1951: 575) . He referred to Helmut Plessner, who found that 'mechanization, methodization, depersonalization of the production process regulate the production of material as well as of intellectual goods' (1924: 472). The division of labour, the cooperation of specialists, the use of machines including the computer, and the possibility for exchanging and substituting individuals in the research project show that the process of industrialization has changed research fundamentally compared to the time when the personality of the individual professor had been of exclusive significance.

Hence, in distance teaching universities the process of industrialization has permeated not only the administration, and the production and dissemination of teaching materials, but also teaching and learning itself and often also research. It is of comprehensive and central significance.

MISUNDERSTANDING 7

Distance education can be industrialized in so far 'as it employs the technology of the twentieth century' and 'produces an unvaried product in large quantities, and therefore, at low cost'. The analogy, however, should not be carried too far. The mediating functions of the support services of tutors and counsellors cannot be industrialized (Sewart 1982: 27, 28).

This concept of industrialization is, indeed, a narrow one. There is much more to it. Tutors and counsellors do not act autonomously but perform welldefined functions in a teachinglearning system. These functions are derived from the instruction designed by a course team or a professor. This is a clear result of the division of labour. They could not work without the rest of the university, especially not without the course material. In a special sense they are instrumentalized as they are normally not expected to teach in their own right. They are specialists and may accumulate experience in their limited field of activity which is greater than that of ordinary academic teachers. Thus they become experts. Highquality teaching becomes possible because of the contribution of such experts amongst whom the work has been divided. They are connected with the teachinglearning system administratively by some sort of supervision, academically by their loyalty to their faculty, and medially by the computer. As they receive relevant information about their students and their learning achievements via this medium, their tutoring and counselling could be called 'computeraided' (mechanization, automation). They also use other technical media, such as the telephone, as well as the personal letter and in some cases a student magazine.

There is no doubt that industrialized teaching and learning leads to the building of complicated systems in which tutors and counsellors play an important part, but a part. As such their work is also 'industrialized'.

MISUNDERSTANDING 8

The 'industrialization idea' does not do justice to all conceivable forms of distance education. It is perfectly adequate to describe activities of large correspondence schools, of the Open University, of large teaching systems based on radio or TV courses. But what about... very small correspondence schools, entirely run by two or three persons?' (Bååth 1981: 213; Duignan and Teather 1985: 42).

The industrialization of the production process went through many stages beginning with the simple work of small manufacturers and ending with complex and often fully automated enterprises. Thus, the work originally done by a craftworker became more and more industrialized. This development can be studied by looking at the growing importance of technical devices in this process. Their purpose is to free people from routine and hard physical work and to make the process more costeffective.

In the preindustrial period tools were used as extensions and reinforcements of the human body, which at the same time was also the source of the energy needed. The teacher in the classroom acts as a craftworker, using the energy of the body when communicating with students. The pointer and the blackboard are bodily extensions.

The situation becomes entirely different when someone teaches at a distance even in its most simple form. For explanatory reasons I refer to the extreme of one person teaching another by means of personal letters. Here a technical device is used and takes over some of the functions of the teacher. In fact, the letter teaches instead of the teacher. It is possible for the student to learn and relearn from it many times without using the energy of the teacher. The teacher. however, needs a certain amount of organization at home or in the office (at least he or she must procure and store stationery and have a calendar and a list of names). Most important of all, the teacher must be able to rely on the help of communication and transport systems (mail, railways, bicycles and so on), now used as media for carrying instruction. Thus, a considerable organizational infrastructure helps to bring about the teachinglearning process which is only possible with division of labour between the teacher and the communication and transport systems.

This new way of imparting knowledge reduces routine work, is laboursaving and can also be more economical than facetoface teaching even before the teacher decides to duplicate the written lessons and capitalize on the large scale productivity.

Analysing this first and most simple form of distance study we can already recognize tendencies towards the structural elements of industrialization. It is certainly no coincidence that the first correspondence schools were founded and the first railway and postal systems established at the same time, when industrialization began to change our lives.

MISUNDERSTANDING 9

It is a misconception if someone argues that distance study is structurally different from conventional forms of study. Distance study 'is no more than a method of teaching' (Hopper, quoted by Keegan 1980: 18). 'It differs primarily in the means, the method itself' (Mackenzie, Christensen and Rigby, quoted by Keegan 1980: 18). Rebel (1983:171) analysed conventional teaching and distance education and found 'more similarities than differences between them'.

In contrast to this I should like to suggest again that distance study is structurally different from traditional facetoface instruction. I refer to the following obvious characteristic features which can be discerned at first sight: indirect (symbolic) interaction versus direct interaction; highly individualized learning versus learning in groups: coursematerialcentred versus teachercentred instruction; the student being responsible for making decisions as to the time, place, sequence and frequency of selflearning activities versus the teacher being responsible for organizing and delivering instruction.

At a higher level of reflection I stress that distance study is different because it has been developed by the application of the following principles:

Division of labour: many people have to cooperate before learning can take place.

Planning and organization: the various specialists have to work on projects which are subject to detailed prior planning. Their work has to be coordinated by bureaucratic procedures which are organized by the project management.

Mechanization: distance study is not possible without mechanical devices, for example, the letter plus the communication media of the post office, printed matter, radio and television, audio or video cassettes, or the computer for the marking of assignments or computerbased tuition representing the highest level of mechanization, namely automation.

Objectivity of teaching behaviour: the teaching which is traditionally performed subjectively in the classroom or lecture hall becomes objectified in the sense that it becomes an object which can be manipulated. It can be improved, adapted, changed and duplicated and lends itself to mass production.

Scientific control: as distance study is the result of the cooperation of specialists, the efficiency of the teaching can no longer be judged in the same way as is done by the teacher in the classroom: experts have to do the evaluation.

Alienation: in the same way as workers become alienated by strict division of labour, so people involved in the teaching system may become alienated as they often have only limited routine work to do with limited responsibilities. Furthermore, the students have a predisposition to become alienated as they may be used to instruction based on personal interaction yet have to take part in a teachinglearning process that is predominantly depersonalized. A feeling of isolation and frustration can be the consequence of this.

Thinking along these lines, one cannot but conclude that distance study is sui generis as it is the most industrialized form of teaching and learning.

MISUNDERSTANDING 10

Keegan (1980:18) finds the radical separation of the educational principles of distance education and conventional education objectionable. He offers a quotation from R. S. Peters in which the 'culminating stages' of education are characterized in the following way: 'There is little distinction between teacher and taught; they are both participating in the shared experience of exploring a common world. The teacher is simply more familiar with its contours and more skilled in handling the tools for laying bare its mysteries and appraising its nuances. Occasionally in a tutorial this exploration takes the form of a dialogue. But more usually it is a group erperience. The great teachers are those who can conduct such a shared experience in accordance with rigorous canons, and convey, at the same time, the contagion of shared experience in which all are united by a common zeal.' Then Keegan goes on to say. 'There is a huge gulf between this statement and the industrial process that Otto Peters described' and he accuses me of having 'misinterpreted what occurs in conventional education, especially at university level'.

To my mind Keegan's quotation confirms my findings that the educational principles of the two forms of instruction are totally different. Developing industrialized instruction means losing things that might be dear to one's heart: the excitement of direct interaction, the feeling of belonging and, possibly, the warmth of human relations. But at the same time you gain something you can never have in conventional instruction, namely, a very powerful opportunity for teaching students who have so far been denied education. This change has parallels in the development of industry. The craftworker quite often puts his or her personality into the piece of work, so much so that he or she likes it and would rather keep it than sell it. This sentiment is lost when the production process is rationalized and mechanized. The process of alienation begins.

The separation of the two modes of instruction could also be demonstrated by analysing their different advantages and disadvantages, opportunities and dangers. In distance education you simply cannot have the 'sharing of experience in exploring a common world' between a wellliked and esteemed teacher and a learning group as the basis of instruction. Distance students cannot enjoy 'the contagion of a shared enterprise'. The interaction is indirect, emotionfree, and depersonalized. On the other hand, continued experiences in the learning group can never induce a student to develop the strategies and tactics of selfinstruction needed in distance study or the unparalleled selfconfidence and selfreliance of its successful students, not only in its 'culminating stages'. However, if the process of industrialization becomes stronger and permeates conventional instruction as well, there might be a time in the future when the didactic structure of distance study and conventional study will become similar, if not identical.

If, for instance, university tuition were reformed according to current models of 'open learning' and 'independent learning', and became strongly individualized under the systematic guidance of a mentor; if each student were asked to develop a curriculum for him or herself: if study activities were no longer organized into 'classes' and a great deal of the instruction were taken care of with the help of learning packages prepared by supraregional research and development centres; if the student learned to initiate professional activities and experience geared to his or her course of study; if he or she were able to work with a personal computer, using electronic mail and profiting from teleconferencing, then 'the huge gulf' between the two modes of instruction might disappear.

This is even more likely to happen if distance study improves its present structure. Supraregional, preplanned, and preprepared teaching material could allow also for greater individualizing of learning in order to meet the real needs of the students. Counselling and tutoring could be developed more strongly. More students could acquire the courage and ability to initiate and to manage selfhelp groups, and if students also learned to use the emerging techniques of electronic communication successfully, then distance teaching might become more a reformed form of conventional study.

In both modes of instruction it will be the strong relationship between the mentor or counsellor and the student which will become the backbone of the individualized course of study. Their meetings will probably be precious events, direct interaction in its finest and most efficient form. It is here they can 'convey.. . the contagion of a shared enterprise'. It is clear that such mentorstudent relationships can be made possible only because other teaching functions are taken care of with prepared teaching material which is produced industrially.

FINAL REMARKS

What will happen to the iceberg? Will it become smaller and disappear? Will it continue to exist? Is the comparative interpretation outdated after so many years? The many allusions and more extensive reactions to it in the literature, both affirmative and controversial, indicate that dicussion of my concept of distance education as an industrialized form of teaching is still alive. This is, by the way, slightly to my amazement.

Indeed, the 'comparative interpretation' has often been referred to as one aspect of the definition of distance study (Keegan 1980, 1983, 1986; Holmberg 1981, 1985, 1986, 1987; Fritsch 1984, Kaye 1985, Nilsen 1986). It has been used as a theoretical construct in the field of offline and online computerassisted distance education (Andrews and Strain 1985: 143), in an interpretation for a research design (Rekkedal 1983: 23), because of its implications for costeffectiveness (Curran 1985: 26; Turnbull 1988: 430), and as a concept for formulating suggestions for reducing early student dropout (Roberts 1984: 60, 64, 65).

Seemingly, the discussion will continue. There is no evidence that people either want or are able to resist, let alone stop, the changes brought about by the process of industrialization. In due course, it will also affect new conventional teaching and learning projects. Dealing with it is not a figment of mind but an important element of sociological and philosophical research.

REFERENCES

Andrews, J. and Strain, l (1985) 'Computerassisted distance education', in Distance Education, 2: 14357.

Bååth, J. A. (1979) Correspondence education in the light of a number of contemporary teaching models, Malmö: Liber Hermods.
-(1981) 'On the nature of distance education', in Distance Education, 2: 21219.
-(1983) 'Theoretical models for planning correspondence courses', in Epistolodidaktika, 1: 1533.

Curran, C. (1985) 'Costeffective course provision a pilot project', in Epistolodidaktika, 2: 2446.

Duignan, P. A. and Teather, D. C. B. (1985) 'Teaching educational administration externally at postgraduate level at the University of New England', in Distance Education, 6(1): 3455.

Ehmann, C. (1981) 'Fernstudium Fernunterricht: reflections on Otto Peters' research', in Distance Education, 2(2): 22833.

Fritsch, H. (1984) 'Fernstudium', in Enzyklopädie Erziehungswissenschaft,10, Stuttgart: KlettCotta, pp.4946.

Holmberg, B. (1981) Status and 7'rends of Distance Education, London: Kogan Page.
- (1985) Status and Trends of Distance Education, Lund: Lector Publishing.
- (1986) 'A discipline of distance education', in Journal of Distance Education 1(1): 2540.
- (1987) 'The development of distance education research', in The American Journal of Distance Education, 1(3): 1623.

Jeavons, F. (1986) 'ln retrospect: Die didaktische Struktur des Fernunterrichts. Untersuchungen zu einer industrialisierten Form des Lehrens und Lernens by Otto Peters', in Distance Education, 7(1): 164 8.

Kaye, A. l (1985) 'Distance education', in T. Husen and T. N. Postlewaithe (eds) The International Encyclopedia of Education, Oxford/New York: Pergamon Press, pp. 14328.

Kaye, A. J. and Rumble, G. (eds) (1981): Distance Teaching for Higher and Adult Education, London: Croom Helm.

Keegan, D. (1980) 'On defining distance education', in Distance Education, 1, 1: 1336.
-(1983) Six distance education theorists, Hagen FernuniversitätZIFF.
- (1986) The Foundations of Distance Education, London: Croom Helm.

Nilsen, C. (1986) 'On the definition of correspondence education', in Epistolodidaktika, 1: 330.

Peters, O. (1973) Die didaktische Struktur des Fernunterrichts. Untersuchungen zu einer industrialisierten Form des Lehrens und Lernens, Weinheim: Beltz.

Plessner, H. (1924) 'Zur Soziologie der Forschung und ihrer Organisation in der deutschen Universität', in M. Scheler (ed.) Versuche zu einer Soziologie des Wissens, Munich: Duncker & Humboldt, pp. 40725.

Rebel, K. (1983) 'Distance study in West Germany: The DIFF's conceptional contribution', in Distance Education, 4(2): 1718.

Rekkedal, T. (1983) 'Enhancing student progress in Norway', in Teaching at a Distance, 23: 1924.

Roberts, D. (1984) 'Ways and means of reducing early dropout rates', in Distance Education 5(1): 6071.

Romiszowski, A. J. (1981) Designing instructional systems, London: Kogan Page.
- (1984) Producing Instructional Systems: Lesson Planning for Individualized and Group Learning Activities, London: Kogan Page.
- (1986) Developing Autoinstructional Material, London: Kogan Page.
- (1988) The Selection and Use of Instructional Media: For Improved Classroom Teaching and for Improved Interactive Individualized Instruction, London: Kogan Page.

Sewart, D. (1982) 'Individualizing support services', in J. Daniel, M. A. Stroud and J. R. Thompson (eds) Learning at a Distance: A World Perspective, Edmonton: International Council for Correspondence Education, pp. 279.

Schelsky, H. (1963) Einsamkeit und Freiheit. Idee und Gestalt der deutschen Universität und ihre Reformen, Reinbek: Rowohlt.

Schwittmann, D. (1982) 'Time and learning in distance study', in Distance Education 3(1): 14156.

Shale, D. (1987) 'Innovation in international higher education: the open universities', in Journal of Distance Education, 2(1): 724.

Turnball, A. J. (1988) 'Distance education the trend setter', in Developing Distance Education, Oslo: International Council on Distance Education, p. 430.

Weber, M. (1951) 'Wissenschaft als Beruf', in Gesammelte Aufsätze zur Wissenschaftslehre, Tübingen: Mohr, pp. 56697.