The facilitation of distance learning to its optimum is a multi-faceted and problematical endeavor requiring extensive understanding of a broad array of concepts. These would include at a minimum a firm definition of the target group, course design and development, and type and quantity of student-instructor interaction. Embracing the view that learning is an individual student activity that is intended to lead to a goal of some kind, (Holmberg, 1995) frames these concepts in a manner useful for this paper.
From a marketing standpoint, the optimum facilitation of distance learning is predicated on a thorough understanding of the consumer of the product--distance learning students. There are many characteristics that differentiate them from traditional university students. Most significantly they are older, have greater life experience, are employed, and have families (Peters, 1998). Therefore, the demands on the students’ time are manifold and significant. I would submit that the goal of the learning experience desired by the majority of distance learning graduate students today is to acquire a practical, implementable, operational competence in a chosen field. This is not to denigrate the requirement for the more scholarly endeavors in the distance learning arena that some may choose to explore, as they are required for the advancement of knowledge in the discipline. However, the aforementioned ability to demonstrate and apply knowledge competently is the primary motivation for this writer, as well as the vast majority of fellow students with whom the matter has been discussed. The adult students are the crucial element in the process (Peters). This provides additional framing.
Course development should be undertaken with a firm view of student characteristics, motivations, and expectations in consonance with the knowledge deemed requisite by both individual and institutional authorities who have competence and authority in the subject matter. Learning objectives should be clear and relevant. If learning is primarily an individual activity and is attained only through an internalizing process (Holmberg, 1995), then the presentation and structure of the learning matter must facilitate these processes. While guided didactic conversations and learning conversations are useful and have merit, student characteristics would indicate the tutorial-in-print to be a more effective presentation method. This approach ". . . . has a conversational character but it seems to be concerned more with knowledge acquisition than with discussing problems . . . ." (Holmberg, p.51). The latter quote puts a rather fine point on why this approach, in my view, is more consistent with the student characteristics described above. Course structure should be based on a layered approach where understanding of new knowledge is based on an understanding of and integration with previous knowledge. A systems model utilizing top-down methodology while implementing the elaboration theory of a subject overview with increasing levels of detailed elaboration serves the student well.
Interaction between the student and teacher is essential in distance learning, especially where difficulty in grasping knowledge content is concerned. Additionally, Holmberg (1995) elucidates on the essential and timely nature of this interaction with regard to each student’s performance in class. The advent of on-line computer courses and e-mail has greatly facilitated both of these important facets of interaction. I viewed with interest the Baath study that indicated, " . . . . there is no empirical evidence that the frequency of student-tutor interaction exerts any influence on the learning" (Holmberg, 1995, p.124). Thus, I would suspect the same applies for student-student interaction as well. Interaction in the form of evaluating student performance should be done in a manner that determines the students’ understanding of the concepts presented in the course material as opposed to rote memorization of data.
These, as well as numerous other facets of distance learning must be understood if we are to optimize facilitation for the distance learning student.
List what, in your view, are the most important measures to be taken to facilitate distance learning. Course development, interaction and, if possible, also administrative measures are to be included.
I enjoyed surveying the readings and my notes of the conferences for this information: it served as an excellent review. Here is my list, by no means comprehensive, of important measures that facilitate distance learning:
I perceive distance education to be a mode of education traditionally and mainly offered to adult students. It distinguishes itself from traditional education on organizational, structural and pedagogic levels through mediated presentation of subject matter and mediated interaction between student and tutor and in the circumstance that student and tutor do not meet (Holmberg, 1995). Education as a pedagogic principle and process was well established when distance education was introduced and offered to accommodate individuals unable or unwilling to participate in traditional education.
Holmberg cited in his article the advertisement placed by Caleb Philipps' for his "Teacher of the New Method of Short Hand" in the Boston Gazette in 1728 (Battenberg 1971, p.44). I would regard this as a first and perhaps singular milestone in distance education. After two hundred years the number of courses had increased not only in quantity but also in the levels of its administration (occupational training, pre-university study and university study) and therefore in the number of topics or subjects as well as in regard to the geographical areas covered. The diversity in distance education that had resulted by the end of the nineteenth century represents many of the characteristics of this second milestone.
The time periods of these first and second milestones on the organizational and content level coincide with the "first generation" or the "pedagogic core" of distance education as mentioned by Peters (1998, p.10). This pertains to a setting, which regards pedagogics in distance education to be different and special when compared to teaching and learning, structural forms and handicaps, and student type in traditional education.
The twentieth century encompasses the third milestone on this historical and operational journey of distance education. It culminates in the higher degree of public recognition around the 1970's and thus resulting in a better image and prestige worldwide as recognized by Holmberg (1995). In this time frame the "second and third pedagogic generations" of distance education arose. They are distinguished primarily by their sophistication in the use of new technology: teleconferencing in the second and personal computers in the third generation respectively. They also incorporate different types of operating modes at university level: single, dual and mixed modes (Peters, 1998, pp. 15 -16).
The continuous development of distance education has had major impacts on the topics and quantity of courses offered, on the media or technology used, and on the type and number of target groups or individuals addressed. Different attitudes, methodologies, institutionalization, questions, and problems have emerged in the course of its history. These all are specific of distance education making it a discipline in its own right.
Distance education catered from its outset to arising needs by developing new forms of access and distribution. Its promoters succeeded in incorporating tendencies and advancements. We have reached a point where distance education conducts scientific research and purposely modifies itself. At the same time distance education is strategically placing itself to become a recognized partner and leader in education as a whole.
References
BATTENBERG, RW. The Boston Gazette, Marc 20, 1728. Epistolodidaktika 1971:1, pp. 44-45
HOLMBERG, B. 1995. The Evolution of the Character and Practice of Distance Education. Open Learning, June 1995, pp. 47-53
PETERS, O. 1998. Learning and Teaching Distance Education. Analyses and Interpretations from an International Perspective, Kogan Page: London
To address this topic, I believe it is first essential to consider characteristics of the typical distance learner. As students are half the equation in a distance education environment, pervasive characteristics defining this body have a great impact. Throughout history, as Peters points out (1998), the typical distance learner has been an older adult bearing a wealth of life and work experience. Being of advanced age indicates that in most cases this individual juggles a variety of obligations at once including family, work, and schooling. The nature of her lifestyle makes her a part-time rather than full-time learner, but also indicates a strong desire to obtain the knowledge being offered by the distance education program. This individual is often furthering her education to advance within her career, retooling to changing career paths, retooling to reenter the workforce after an absence, simply strengthening existing skills, or sometimes trying to overcome geographical denial of educational opportunities. All of these characteristics translate into a highly motivated, capable, and independent learner who has actively chosen to participate.
Study has typically, and continues to be, conducted solely at a distance for most distance education programs. Whereas historical programs were completely correspondence-based, it is now possible to provide a variety of options, including on-site tutoring and on-site laboratory sessions. As the profile of the distance learner has not altered much, however, it is often not a desirable feature to force on-site attendance as this may conflict with other of life's obligations.
"Non-contiguous communication, sometimes supplemented by face-to-face contacts, no doubt represents the praxis of most distance-teaching institutions…" (Holmberg, 1995). Sir Isaac Pitman and Anna Eliot Ticknor's use in the mid 1800s of written communication (Holmberg, 1995), albeit infrequent and most likely unreliable, to provide feedback and assess student work represents a form of two-way non-contiguous communication. The communication medium has changed dramatically, with the advent of fax and electronic mail, and has gravitated towards a technical nature, but the premise remains the same. A student typically studies alone on a personalized study schedule (self-paced to a varying degree), but receives empathetic support and feedback from, and interaction with a tutor thus enabling her to remain on track to complete the given course.
Clearly, interaction that the student has with the preproduced course materials (a form of one-way non-contiguous communication (Holmberg, 1995)) plays a vital role in distance education. Whether the materials be individually packaged printed lessons, textbooks, audiotapes, or streaming video seminars presented via computer, there are classic development considerations that have been historically employed by all successful distance education programs. These considerations include: gearing course materials appropriately toward the "characteristics of the target groups" (Holmberg, 1995); clearly defining objectives -- with tutor-student input where appropriate; writing materials in succinct and easily understandable language; providing useful self-assessment tools within the materials; and providing the course materials in a manner which permits the student the most freedom.
Last, but not least, is the characteristically evolutionary nature of technology. While the core principles of distance education detailed above have remained fairly static, technology has evolved rather quickly over time. It might be asked whether a "change" such as the use of technology could be considered a pervasive characteristic. I would argue that distance education's historical embracing of the newest technological advances has been a recurring theme throughout time.
References
Holmberg, Boerje. (1995). The Evolution of the Character and Practice of Distance Education. In Open Learning (pp. 47-53). Publisher: Location (unknown).
Holmberg, Boerje. (1995). Theory and Practice of Distance Education. Routledge, Inc.:London/New York.
Peters, Otto. (1998). Learning and Teaching in Distance Education. Kogan Page Ltd.: London.
"The first step to knowledge is to know we are ignorant." --- Cecil (Webster, 1958 version)
The state of distance education as we presently know it can be thanked, in large part, to an international community, whose actions, unaugured at the time, set the stage for an evolution of far-reaching change. It is through the series of multiple solitary acts of those individuals who saw the barriers placed before them, and consequently had the fortitude to bring forth the gradual exodus that paved the way to an adaptation of learning. Like all successful endeavors, these pioneers had found a need and incorporated a solution to fill that need.
Distance learning propagated from a necessity to learn outside the confines of a traditional synchronous classroom setting, where both teacher and students "…are present at the same time for interaction between them to take place" (Holmberg, 2000, p. 1) and a desire for convenience. Due to the physical, emotional and societal demands of work and family, as well as the geographical problems and considerations of those living in remote areas, it was extremely difficult to obtain a higher level of learning for persons living in the latter half of the nineteenth century. (Holmberg, 1995, p. 47)
The progression of distance education can be broken down into three components or eras: the correspondence era, the era of dignity and the era of accessibility. Each has its own unique characteristics, which distinguishes it from one another.
The Correspondence Era
The correspondence era, beginning in the early eighteenth century, could be marked by the development of instructional materials being sent to a student’s address of preference, a novel idea at the time. The materials were of an academic and occupational nature, although academics through correspondence in a university-like setting were not widely promoted until the latter part of the nineteenth century. Courses at that time ranged from a myriad of subjects, including shorthand, composition, foreign languages and even mining methods. (Holmberg, 1995, pp. 47-48)
Other significant factors can be found during the correspondence era. The use of mediums was very limited. During that time the only types of media available were printed works, the written word and phonographic recordings. (Holmberg, 1995, p. 47) What is curious and intriguing about this period is the virtual snowball effect that correspondence schools played on an international level. Although the first evidence of distance education took place as early as 1728 in Boston, it was not until an advertisement in Sweden appeared for "an opportunity to study ‘Composition through the medium of the Post’ (Holmberg, 1995, p. 48) that the one-hundred-year ball started to roll throughout England, Germany, the United States, Japan and Britain. The rapid succession of distance education through private correspondence schools had begun its international sweep.
The Era of Dignity
Toward the latter two decades of the 1800’s, universities from Britain and the United States began its foray into the world of distance education. Among them were noted universities from both sides of the Atlantic, including Skerry’s College in Edinburgh, founded in 1878, and the Correspondence University in Ithaca, New York, founded in 1883. (Holmberg, 1995, pp. 48-49) These, and other institutions similar to them, prepared students in a variety of courses.
It was not until 1969, two hundred and forty-one years after the first gleaning of distance education, that a new era emerged --- the era of dignity. This era saw the development of the first full degree-granting institutions, the first being The British Open University in 1969. (Holmberg, 1995, p. 49) The British Open University, and others that followed, continued its use of print as a medium but implemented advanced forms of technological media, including the use of audio recordings, radio and television.
In terms of public recognition and acceptance, distance education was coming into its own. With the powerful, prestigious backing of these universities, students, scholars and the public alike began to recognize the benefits of distance education and accept it as a viable educational alternative. The reputation of skepticism that earmarked the correspondence era gave way to an era of acceptance and dignity.
The Era of Accessibility
What took over two centuries for one era to span over into the other, would take a mere decade for the last to begin to unfold. This era would see far-sweeping changes that would further entrench distance education into the mainstream. What brands this era is the rapid advancement in technology and its use in distance education. The introduction of the video recorder, computer, satellite, the Internet and other technological innovations has not changed the inherent structure of distance education per se, but has altered the way it is applied.
With technology at distance educators’ fingertips, it has opened a whole new world of accessibility to its students. Technology has opened the doors for a greater number of people to pursue education that until now would not otherwise be possible. From a personal standpoint, accessibility of information was the number one determining factor in my pursuit of a post-secondary education. Without the aid of these technological advances, my educational goals would never have been realized.
Conclusion
From its earliest beginnings, from those pioneering people who paved a way for correspondence schools to those equally innovative peoples who implemented distance education in university settings to the present navigators of technology, distance education has come full circle to an era of acceptance, and a viable alternative to traditional education. Although each era exhibits differing characteristics, the constants of each remain the same. As Boerje Holmberg (2000) so aptly states, "It seems worth stressing, however, that the two basic constituent elements of today’s distance education, i.e. mediated subject-matter presentation and mediated student-tutor interaction, were the vital characteristics also of the very early actions to bring about education in situations when students and tutors do not meet." (p. 1) As it was then, so it is now we reap the rewards of enlightened visionaries of education at a distance.
References
Allee, J. G. (Ed.). (1958). Webster’s Encyclopedia of Dictionaries, In New American Edition. USA:Ottenheimer.
Holmberg, B. (1995). The Evolution of the Character and Practice of Distance Education, In Web Tycho [Online]. Available: http:www.tychousa.umuc.edu [2000, February 11]
Holmberg, B. (2000). Further elucidation on what you read. In WebTycho [Online]. Available: http:/www.tychousa.umuc.edu [2000, February 25]
Holmberg, B. (2000). To all members of this class. In WebTycho [Online] Available: htttp:/www.tychousa.umuc.edu [2000, February 25]
What pervasive traits characterize distance education, not only now, but throughout its history?
If I state pervasive characteristics of distance education, am I defining distance education ? A basic requirement of distance education relies on logistics. Distance education needs to be transmittable and deliverable to the learner and return decipherable and interpretable to the tutor.
Holmberg considers the traffic pattern of distance education as two constituent elements {p.2}. One-way traffic presents learning matter to the student. The return two-way traffic opens up student-tutor interaction. Once a traffic pattern, or method of delivery and return is established, the "distance" component of distance education is launched. Is an established traffic pattern sufficient to inaugurate it as distance education? The course readings have presented an array of variables to consider.
Four aspects of Keegan's definition of distance education outline consistent characteristics : separation of teacher and learner, influence by an educational organization, media to relay educational content and two-way communication {p. 14}. A remaining component offering the possibility of social and didactic meetings falls a bit short as characterizing distance education because distance education is not dependent on this type of activity.
The pedagogical elements of distance education, discussed in Otto Peters' book, are more elusive to characterization. Learning components are not exclusive to distance education, nor is use of technology. Characterizing distance education as a discipline for adult learners is likely to become an historical perspective. Although adult learners have been the primary target audience, distance education is not mutually exclusive to adults. New and younger populations are emerging rapidly. Even structuralization is fluid and difficult to characterize. Athabasca University, as Eugene Rubin pointed out, was until recently, a "correspondence" institution {personal communication, 22-15-2000}. Student support occurred via the telephone. Recent communication with Dr. Doug Crawford at Athabasca found him at the completion of a two week conference discussion with his Introduction to Distance Education Training class. Distance Education is, above all, a work in progress.
Do the characteristics of distance education define Distance Education? Keegan's defining elements of distance education include the fixed characteristics of two-way, non-contiguous communication and organizational support. Peter's pedagogical elements are shaped by their adaptability. Perhaps it is efficient and sufficient, then, to characterize distance education by Holmberg's two constituent elements, with a caveat regarding traffic. The tracks are not what run the train. Holmberg's empathy approach, including guided didactic conversations, points to what advances the traffic {p. 47, 103}. Attempts to characterize distance education beyond that might best be accomplished by determining the characteristics of the targeted distance learners and determining the characteristics of distance teaching, each as a separate entity.
Kaye and Rumble identified two subsystems : "a course subsystem and a student subsystem" {Holmberg, 145}. Subsystems could include all of the learning variables and supports. Peters similarly noted that "future distance pedagogics might be restricted to clarifying the specific contributions of participating disciplines and their relationships with one another . . ."{p. 5}.
Dr. Crawford prefers to define distance education as "situationally dependent" and offered a practical approach. "So long as you spell out what you are talking about up front, you may have a better shot at communicating" {personal communication, 2-1-2000}. Perhaps, the most fundamental characteristic of distance education is that it is, above all else, a communication process.
REFERENCES :
Bernath, U. and Rubin, E., A Virtual Seminar for International Professional Development in Distance Education. http://www.umuc.edu/~erubin/article 1.html
Holmberg, B. {1995}, Theory and Practice of Distance Education, Routledge: London/New York
Keegan, D. {1990}, Foundations of Distance Education, Routledge: London/New York
Peters, O. {1998}, Learning and Teaching in Distance Education. Analysis and Interpretations from an International Perspective, Kogan Page: London