|
.
..
.

|
|
IPSE
Research
in Distance Education
by Michael Jeffries
Assistant Director of Educational
Services, IHETS |
| The History of Distance Education
|
| Understanding the history of distance
education is valuable in that it shows there was more than one
historical path to distance education and that the evolution of
distance education has not been easy. Many of the same problems facing
implementation and acceptance of educational innovations today have
been faced by distance education throughout its history.
The history of distance education could
be tracked back to the early 1700s in the form of correspondence
education, but technology-based distance education might be best
linked to the introduction of audiovisual devices into the schools in
the early 1900s.
The first catalog of instruction films
appeared in 1910 (Reiser, 1987) and in 1913, Thomas Edison proclaimed
that, due to the invention of film, "Our school system will be
completely changed in the next ten years" (Saettler, 1968, p. 68).
This dramatic change didn't occur, but
instructional media were introduced into many extension programs by
1920 in the form of slides and motion pictures just as they were in
the classroom.
In tracing the history of distance
education, the introduction of television as an instructional medium
appears as an important entry point for theorists and practitioners
outside of the correspondence education tradition, and marks parallel
paths for correspondence study and instructional media.
Although instructional radio failed in
the 1930s, instructional television was viewed with new hope. In 1932,
seven years before television was introduced at the New York World's
Fair, the State University of Iowa began experimenting with
transmitting instructional courses.
World War II slowed the introduction of
television, but military training efforts had demonstrated the
potential for using audio-visual media in teaching (Wright, 1991).
The apparent success of audio-visual
generated a renewed interest in using it in the schools and in the
decade following the war there were intensive research programs (Reiser,
1987). Most of these studies were directed at understanding and
generating theory on how instructional media affected classroom
learning.
The 1940s saw great interest in television by educators but little
action (Adams, 1958), and by 1948 only five U.S. educational
institutions were involved in television with Iowa State being the
first on the air.
Early studies by educators tended to
show that student achievement from classroom television was as
successful as from traditional face-to-face instruction. A study by
Parsons (1957) showed only borderline differences in achievement, and
Lapore and Wilson (1958) offered research showing that learning by
television compared favorably with conventional instruction.
By the late 1950s, 17 programs used
television in their instructional materials. The use of educational
television tended to grow slowly but by 1961, 53 stations were
affiliated with the National Educational Television Network (NET) with
the primary goal of sharing films and coordinating scheduling (Hull,
1962).
Although instructional television would
never realize what many thought was its potential, it was having
limited success and had, unlike instructional radio, established a
foothold in the minds of educators.
In 1956 the Correspondence Study
Division of the NUEA conducted a study of the use of television to
support correspondence instruction (Wright, 1991). The survey report
recommended research to measure the effectiveness of television as an
educational tool and, with a grant from the Ford Foundation, Gayle
Childs studied television instruction in combination with
correspondence study.
In one of the earliest education vs.
media studies, Childs concluded that television is not an
instructional method, but an instrument for transmitting instruction.
He also found no appreciable difference in the achievement level of
students taught in regular classrooms by means of television or by a
combination of correspondence study and television (Almeda, 1988).
In the early 1960s, the innovative Midwest Program on Airborne
Television Instruction (MPATI) launched its "flying classroom" from an
airfield near Purdue University in Lafayette, Indiana to broadcast
instructional programs to school systems and the general public in
Indiana and five surrounding states (Smith, 1961).
At its peak, MPATI would transmit
educational television programs to nearly 2,000 public schools and
universities reaching almost 400,000 students in 6500 classrooms in
Indiana and five surrounding states (Gordon, 1965).
This experiment in learning was the
culmination of an educational vision for some educators and the result
of a $7 million grant from the Ford Foundation (Carnegie Commission,
1979), a small part of the $170 million spent by the foundation.
Although the airborne teaching
experiment came down in 1968, the MPATI project succeeded in several
ways, including stimulating enough interest in educational television
(ETV) in its region that new ETV stations were started. Many schools
began using their own closed circuit television (CCTV) systems, and
others began experimenting with Instructional Fixed Television Service
(ITFS) microwave systems.
An even greater accomplishment (Wood
and Wylie, 1977, p. 209) was that the MPATI project got educators from
the six-state region to work together to select curriculum and to
design and produce "the best example of an agreed-upon body of
inter-institutional curriculum materials." And finally, it succeed in
organizing hundreds of autonomous school districts to work together
for a common educational goal.
The number of educational television stations grew more rapidly in the
1960s and, by 1972, 233 educational stations existed (Carnegie
Commission, 1979). Ohio University, University of Texas and the
University of Maryland were among the earliest universities to create
networks to reach for both on-campus and off-campus student
populations (Brientenfield, 1968), and many universities were
considering how to bring distance learning to select student
populations.
By the mid 1960s, much of the interest
in funding instructional television had abated, and the Ford
Foundation shifted its support to public television. Much of the blame
was placed on the mediocre quality of the instructional programming
which was often little more than a teacher delivering a lecture (Reiser,
1987).
The 1967 Carnegie Commission on Higher
Education concluded that "the role played in formal education by
instructional television has been on the whole a small one... With
minor exceptions, the total disappearance of instructional television
would leave the educational system fundamentally unchanged" (pp.
80-81). Reasons given for instructional television not being adopted
included teacher resistance to television in the classroom, the
expense of the television systems, and the inability of television
alone to meet the various conditions for student learning (Reiser,
1987).
In the late 1960s and early 1970s,
microwave technology developed, costs went down, and universities
began to set up microwave networks to take advantage of the
Instructional Television Fixed Service (ITFS) authorized by the
Federal Communications Commission. The Carnegie Commission on Higher
Education predicted that, by the year 2000, more than 80 percent of
off-campus and 10 to 20 percent of on-campus instruction would take
place through telecommunications (Carnegie Commission, 1972).
Systems utilizing ITFS technology were
able to reach regional campuses and other universities, but it
remained a closed circuit concept (Wood and Wylie, 1977) reaching only
the sites linked to the system and not the general public. It did
appear that, for the first time, distant students were considered part
of the extended classroom, and television existed to access those not
able to come to campus (Dean, 1982). |
| Educational Experiments and Change
|
| Alternatives to
traditional higher education emerged in the U.S. in the 1960s and
1970s. Trends such as escalating college costs, a renewed interest in
nontraditional education by a more mobile population, and success of
Britain's Open University paved the way for numerous experiments in
higher education (Gerrity, 1976).
Programs such as the
University Without Walls, external degree programs, and imitations of
the British Open University were encouraged by large grants from the
Carnegie Commission on Higher Education.
The instructional
technology movement was defining its purpose during the late 1960s and
moving further away from equating instructional technology with
audio-visual devices (Reiser, 1987). In 1970, the Department of
Audiovisual Instructional changed its name to the Association for
Educational Communication and Technology, and defined educational
technology as "a field involved in the facilitation of human learning
through the systematic identification, development, organization, and
utilization of a full range of learning resources ....(AECT, 1972, pp.
36-37). The same period saw an increased attention to instructional
technology and "systems" approaches to the design of instruction based
on theories of cognitive psychology and individualized instruction (Reiser,
1987).
Distance education
programs which exist today have a wide range of approaches. The CALS
program offers independent study courses through computer networking
and relies heavily on computer-based student contact and feedback.
Nova University offers computer-delivered instruction; and the
students communicate with instructors through electronic mail, attend
some concentrated centralized class sessions, and meet in weekend
cluster groups. The Mind Extension University offers undergraduate and
graduate degrees through cable networks, and it supplements video
courses with texts and other collateral materials.
In summary, the history
of distance education shows a field that appears to be in a constant
state of evolution, that is supported by theory, but in need of
research which can fill many unanswered questions. The historical view
of distance education shows a stream of new ideas and technologies
balanced against a steady resistance to change, and it often places
technology in the light of promising more than it has delivered.
History shows nontraditional education trying to blend with
traditional education while striving to meet the challenge of
constantly changing learning theories and evolving technologies. |
| |
| Defining Distance
Education |
| "Distance education is
beset with a remarkable paradox - it has asserted its existence, but
it cannot define itself." (Shale, 1988, p. 25).
How distance education is
best defined or differentiated from other educational approaches has
been the subject of much debate. From the perspective of many
educationaltechnologists, distance education is "inexorably linked to
the technology" (Garrison, 1987) and seems to be viewed as different
from other forms of education, a factor which may contribute to course
development and acceptance problems.
Focusing on the distance factor and on technology takes the emphasis
off the "dialectical relationship between teacher and student" which
Shale feels is the foundational principle in the educational process
(Shale, 1988, p. 25). To Shale, "distance" (and the technology which
accompanies it) is an incidental consideration and not a "defining
criterion" for education.
A broadening of the
definition of distance education is urged by Barker, Frisbie and
Patrick (1989) who acknowledge correspondence study as the historical
foundation of distance education but suggest that there is really two
forms of distance education. One is the traditional correspondence-
based distance education which is independent study oriented and the
second is telecommunications-based distance education which offers the
teaching and learning experience simultaneously (1989, p. 23).
The Garrison and Shale
definition of distance education (1987a, p. 10-11) offers a minimum
set of criteria and allows more flexibility. They suggest that:
- distance education implies that the majority of educational
communication between teacher and student occurs non contiguously
- distance education involves two-way communication between teacher and
student for the purpose of facilitating and supporting the educational
process
- distance education uses technology to mediate the necessary two-way
communication.
|
| Philosophy and Organization of
Distance Education |
The organizational
pattern and operating practices of a distance education facility are
generally based upon the educational philosophy of that institution as
well as economic and political restrictions (Verduin & Clark, 1991).
Most educators would prefer a more student-centered model while
politics and economics might dictate a more institution-centered
approach with greater control and a larger number of students.
Three different modes of operation under which distance education can
operate are identified by Rumble (1986), including:
Sole responsibility -
where the institution and its administration have distance education
as their sole responsibility and purpose, such as with the Open
University in the United Kingdom. Administration and faculty focus on
distance education teaching methods and student needs, and are not
controlled by other programs or purposes. Development of teaching
techniques and innovative practices are seen as primary benefits.
Mixed mode - institutions where both distance and conventional
education occur, such as the University of New England in Australia
and most traditional American universities. Organization may fall
under a single department with university administration being
responsible, several departments may offer distance education with
each department administering its own program, or a distinct unit may
offer distance education in a variety of areas and be solely devoted
to this purpose. The mixed mode approach may have the advantage of
being able to draw upon the resources of the resident faculty and
services, but a disadvantage is that some faculty and administrators
may consider distance education to be less effective and less
important than campus-based instruction.
Consortium - a group of institutions or distance education programs
devoted to distance education as a means of broadening or sharing
distance education programming. Students may register with their own
institution and use centrally-developed learning materials with
credits being easily transferable. This is one of the fastest growing
segments of distance education (Verduin & Clark, 1991) but it also
experiences administrative problems when it comes to collaboration
between universities and conflicts in philosophical differences,
teaching resources, and cost sharing. The University of Mid-America
failed in its attempt at a consortium but efforts such as the Mind
Extension University(r) are viewed as a success.
Any organizational or
administrative structure must have effective communication for it to
succeed. Distance education, with its diversity of activities and
staffing, the nature of its students, and externally based
instructional programming, requires very effective communication.
According to Verduin and Clark (1991), information must flow in such a
manner that all involved are aware of common goals, activities and
procedures, and the appropriate feedback is possible whenever
necessary.
Kaye and Rumble (1981)
cite the problems of educational institutions in introducing distance
learning programs, and suggest that a major issue confronting many
universities is how to resolve the conflict between distance
education, which often requires the management and structure of a
business enterprise, and traditional academic areas which have a
completely different style of governance. These differences "often
find expression in a conflict between academic 'freedom of action' and
the necessity for maintaining effective production mechanisms" (p.
179) necessary for distance education course development and
distribution.
The separation between
innovation and organization can "converge" as the innovation moves
toward institutionalization through boundary expansion and resolution
of conflicts (Levine, 1980, p. 14). It is this integration process
which is the goal of most distance education programs at traditional
universities, but studies suggest that there are often institutional
barriers to the convergence of distance and mainstream education.
To focus on
technologies without considering their role as a catalyst for change
can adversely affect the ability of technologies to enact change (Heinich,
1982). Heinich suggests that we tend to treat all technological
innovations almost the same, yet technologies such as television can
affect the power structure in education, and faculty prefer the power
structure the way it is.
Power and politics are
primary forces in the implementation process; and school systems, like
other social systems, have to be viewed in terms of the seeking,
allocation and use of power (Meyer & Rowan, 1978). According to
Sarason (1990), the communication network, which is dependent on
personal contact and on who knows whom, often identifies the path for
implementation of an innovation.
Innovators have been
accused of being so passionate about their innovation that their
reality is distorted and they fail to consider the importance of
building constituencies to help support their cause (Sarason, 1990)
and Rogers (1983) even identifies a "pro-innovation bias" which often
appears in the implementation of an innovation and any related
research which follows. Educational innovations seem to receive strong
support from a relatively small segment of adopters but may have
limited support from the group effected. Bardach (1978) suggests that
even when an effort is made to develop support from constituents, it
is difficult to find a cause with "a broad commonality of interest
that would form the basis for coalition building" (p. 42).
Educational change is technically simple and socially complex, and
definitely not a linear process. Educational innovations such as the
early distance education programs were probably motivated by a
"vision" that Fullan (1991) would suggest "permeates the organization
with values, purpose, and integrity for both the what and how of
improvement ... its formation, implementation, shaping and reshaping
in specific organizations is a constant process" (p. 81-82). For a
vision to become a reality, Miles stresses that it must be "shareable"
and be shared with others; "it provides direction and driving power
for change, and the criteria for steering and choosing" (1987, p. 12).
And this vision must include a shared vision of the change process
which can provide a strategy for implementation.
Although there are clear strategies for implementing innovations,
change is often at the mercy of organizational culture. "Attempts at
innovation in schools have usually ignored the cultural and structural
traditions of the sociocultural system ... If a school has a culture
in place, and there is ample evidence to suggest it does, those
involved in the rigorous maintaining of the status quo are not going
to be eager candidates for innovation" (Schrum, 1991, p. 37).
A case study of Athabasca University in Alberta, Canada by Shale
(1985) showed some surprising results. Although the university was an
"open" distance education facility and with a commitment to trying
innovative educational approaches, over time it had become more and
more traditional. In the beginning, the core of the academic program
was the instructional designer with few academic staff, and
multi-media was used heavily. But this emphasis on innovation changed
and now the role of the instructional designer is not as important as
that of the teacher, courses follow a more traditional lecture
approach, and little use is made of media except to enhanced written
materials.
Shale suggests that understanding this shift back to the traditional
lies "in a deeper understanding of what a university is" (1985, p. 11)
and whether a traditional university allows for change and innovation.
The educational technology point of view appears to regard education
as "packageable" while universities are traditionally characterized by
process, academic staff, and research. Costs andthe time required to
produce distance education courses are two factors suggested for this
tendency to the traditional, but Shale also feels distance education
has not dealt with some of the natural boundaries such as jurisdiction
and coordination, factors which impact on the institutionalization of
distance education programs.
Directions in Research
Much of the research done to date has centered around the use of new
technologies for teaching and distance education's effectiveness as a
teaching medium. A predominance of this research has used survey
questionnaires with closed-ended questions with the range of options
determined by the researcher (Morgan, 1984). This empirical research
is useful for studying drop-out rates, learning about student
preferences, and attempting to compare the variety of media used for
delivery, but Morgan (1984) has urged that qualitative research
methods be used to study distance education as a whole. Coldeway
(1988) acknowledges that the focus of most distance education
institutions is on the technology but suggests that the research is
shifting to "the more human side" of the system as the programs age.
Holmberg (1984), as an
international authority on distance education, strongly urges
undertaking inductive studies of distance education "organization" to
look at administrative framework, processes of developing and
distributing learning materials, interaction between system members,
and other activities required by society and the educational
establishment. This type of study has not been done and seems to have
value for establishing new distance education programs or making
comparisons with other traditional and nontraditional programs. |
| Roles in the
Instructional Process |
| A team approach to the
development of learning materials is often considered the most
appropriate for distance education. The team would be responsible for
assessing adult needs, designing learning packages, providing
guidance, and assessing performance, and it would include academic
content specialists, instructional designers, writers and editors,
media specialists, and specialists in adult learner behavior and
curriculum development (Verduin & Clark, 1991). These instructional
development activities should support the institution's philosophy and
goals, and the mission of the distance education program.
If anything is evident in
this team approach, it has the potential to be complex and open to
interpretation. The roles of academic content specialists,
instructional designers, writers and editors, media specialists, and
specialists in adult learner behavior and curriculum development can
be seen to overlap and to not be very clearly defined. An educational
technologist may have skills in instructional design, as a media
specialist, in adult learning behavior and in curriculum development,
and their job may begin with assessing program needs and end with
product implementation. But their role may be perceived as someone
working primarily to implement electronic technology into the learning
system or simply be misunderstood. The counter problem is that "use of
computers, television, teleconferencing, and other means of
transmission does not make one an educational technologist" (Wagner,
1990, p. 62).
The relationship
between distance education and educational technology is viewed as
strong, but the problem of defining roles for instructional designers/
developers is difficult. And the role of the educational technologist
may be defined, not by the field, but by the organization's philosophy
of education and their broader educational goals. Wagner (1990)
suggests that an issue to consider is whether "distance education can
afford to emphasize technology" or whether "it must emphasize
instruction" (p. 62). Wagner suggests that educational technology can
serve as a holistic approach where process and product are both
components of the system. |
| Teachers in Distance
Education |
| The likelihood of
significant increases in distance learning enrollments within the next
decade will have a profound impact on faculty members' instructional
roles, according to Beaudoin (1990). The changes that he envisions are
tied to distance education's more learner-centered system, and he
predicts that teachers accustomed to more conventional teaching modes
will have to "acquire new skills to assume expanded roles not only to
teach distance learners, but also to organize instructional resources
suitable in content and format for independent study" (Beaudoin, 1990,
p. 21) A key
player in the distance education team should be the teacher since the
use of telecommunications inhigher education requires faculty
acceptance (Dillon, 1989). But "negative faculty attitudes, ranging
from apathy to open antagonism, remain a major barrier" to
implementation of distance education programs (Brock, 1987, p. 40). A
growing acceptance among university faculty is acknowledged by Brock
and he blames faculty attitude on a resistance to required changes in
familiar teaching patterns and the faculty having to relinquish a
degree of control over the teaching-learning process.
A survey of Oklahoma
administration, faculty and telecourse coordinators led Dillon to
suggest expanded rewards and more faculty development efforts, and to
express the belief that the success of distance education will
"require changes in the practices and attitudes of faculty in an
environment that is still suspicious of or threatened by the
nontraditional. Only the system which effectively rewards it will
succeed at change" (1989, p. 42). A survey of teachers using satellite
delivery methods showed a significant growth in credit course delivery
since 1984, but it also identified several problem areas. According to
Albright (1988), needs assessments were rarely conducted prior to
course development, interactivity was minimal due to the practice of
uplinking videotaped lectures, the visual components of most courses
were underutilized, faculty training was limited to technical
considerations, and faculty efforts were largely unrecognized for
promotion and tenure. A study by Clark (1993) has also attempted to
measure faculty attitudes toward distance education and specific media
used in distance education. Among Clark's finding were: 1) that
university faculty who were slightly positive about the concept of
distance education were more negative about their personal use of
distance education, 2) faculty who were more familiar with distance
education were more receptive, and 3) faculty was more positive toward
telecourses and video conferencing, and less positive toward
correspondence and audio conferencing. Respondents expressed the
normal concerns about course quality, student-teacher interaction, and
faculty rewards for teaching distance education courses. Clark
suggests that, with faculty still being ambivalent about distance
education, a cautious optimism regarding the future of distance
education in the U.S. is appropriate. |
| Technology and
Teaching |
| Most educational
technologists do link distance education to technology (Garrison,
1987) and may view it as different from other forms of education.
Claims about the affect of new technologies on learning have caused
many people to suggest a change in the way new technologies are
evaluated for distance learning (Clark, 1989). Although Salomon (1981)
and Clark (1991) make the point that instructional strategies and not
the medium are the key to effective learning, technology and
production considerations rather than teaching-learning theory or the
instructional development process are often the driving force behind
distance education programs.
The interest in utilizing
"instructional technologies" to accomplish a variety of educational
delivery needs has grown to the point where "preparing teachers to use
technologies is assumed to be the main function and primary
intellectual interest of the educational technologist" (Heinich,
1982). While Heinich feels that teacher preparation is needed, he
points to this as a problem in defining the field of educational
technology. Romiszowski (1981) suggests that the educational field
"has been plagued with more than its fair share of solutions looking
for problems" and suggests that developers often reflect a vested
interest in technology or make premature decisions to the
instructional solution before fully understanding the problem.
Studies on the use of
various media in distance education have supported Schramm's view that
"learning seems to be affected more by what is delivered than by the
delivery medium" (1977, p. 273) and Clark's analogy of media "not
influencing learning any more than the truck that delivers groceries
influences the nutrition of a community" (1983, p. 3). Also, studies
comparing education in the classroom with technologically-deliveredclasses
(Beare, 1989; McCleary and Egan, 1989) showed no significant
differences in academic performance.
Recent developments in technology are believed to be removing some of
the disadvantages associated with media in distance education. Bates
(1984) suggests that new technologies promise "a wider range of
teaching functions and a higher quality of learning, lower costs,
greater student control, more interaction and feedback for students"
(p. 223). In fact, the 1990s are experiencing the emergence of digital
media which has the potential to blur the lines which separate various
media, as predicted by Baltzer (1985).
The issue of media vs. method is likely to continue to be debated in
relation to distance education, but there is no doubt that distance
education is different from other instructional approaches. A study by
Gehlauf, Shatz and Frye (1991) on the reaction of teachers to the
teaching experience in the traditional classroom compared to
interactive television shows teachers wanting to cling to more
traditional approaches but finding these methods not as effective,
teachers feeling the need to be better organized, and feeling the need
for training for distance education teaching.
|
|
.
|