Len Hatfield:
Here are some propositions to help us get started in the brainstorming
process. .
. glance down the list, and then write a response in the lower window.
When you're
ready to transmit this to the rest of the group, just click on the send
button.
- Virginia Tech should allow any Virginia resident who can be
admitted to get an undergraduate or graduate degree from
home/office.
- Virginia Tech's distance education should be limited to
graduate and continuing education programs only.
- The most important reason for implementing a comprehensive
distance education program is to remain competitive with
other educational institutions.
- Students cannot learn as well from a distance based education
program as they can from formal classroom study.
- Distance education programs will cause the university to
downsize in faculty and facilities.
Valerie Hardcastle:
I think that one thing that needs to be kept in mind is the time and effort
required
on the part of faculty to get distance courses up and running (and keep
them up and
running). I hear talk that cyberizing our courses will allow us to
"do more with
less." I don't buy it.
Edward A. Fox (Ed):
We need a reliable evaluation technique for distance learning courses to
allow determination
of the quality of learning.
Len Hatfield:
>From our earlier discussion, it seems vital to refine our analysis and
proposals for
using networked computer technology for teaching and learning.
Valerie Hardcastle:
Given the conversation we just had, I suspect that having degree programs
completely
distanced would be a mistake. Students seem to need and expect some face
to face
interaction.
Tom Head:
Yes, we need to meet the needs of our citizens.
DL should not be limited to graduate and continuing education because of
competitive
pressures on enrollment in the long run.
We need to remain competitive and meet the needs of citizens who cannot
come to campus.
Tom Head:
There is no evidence that students cannot learn in distance education
program.
Valerie Hardcastle:
I personally am an advocate of the mixed model approach. Different
students learn
best in different environments, so having different learning platforms
available
so that students can personalize their own courses would be the most
profitable approach.
Edward A. Fox (Ed):
Distance learning is "fragile". We are dependent on a number of
technologies, approaches
to pedagogy, infrastructure --- if those are not reliable we should not, if
we are
fair to students, proceed this way. Even if there are fail-soft solutions,
these
are likely to be disruptive and reduce effectiveness.
Tom Head:
DL will allow the University to survive and remain healthy as the number of
students
in the 18-22 age who can afford to come to campus decreases.
Len Hatfield:
In response to one of Chuck's questions, then, I'd say we need to avoid
"all or nothing"
style responses: distance ed can't be conceived either as panacea or
demonspawn;
its effectiveness may be unrelated to downsizing, or indeed, may be counter
productive to downsizing. I've sometimes argued this in terms of using the
technology to enhance
the teaching/learning process rather than as a replacement of teachers and
techniques
already used.
Valerie Hardcastle:
Is our university system so fragile that we cannot go with the ebb and flow
of our
population?
Valerie Hardcastle:
Is there any evidence (other than anecdoctal) that students would enroll in
a distance
learning program in suitable numbers to make it worthwhile?
Len Hatfield:
I tend to agree with you, Ed; I think, though, that unless faculty lead the
push to
improve the infrastructure, we won't be able to exploit the potential of DL to reach
hitherto unreached students.
Valerie Hardcastle:
There is something to be said for a university community, having all the
learners
in the same place at the same time. Could this be replaced with a distance
community?
I guess AOL does this with their chat rooms, etc.
Tom Head:
Old Dominion is projecting an enrollment of 12,000 students by the year
2000 in their
TeleTechnet program. They are eating away at the soft underbelly of our
enrollment
base throughout the state.
Valerie Hardcastle:
I a skeptical, Tom, that a student would prefer to attend OD TT program
instead of
attending a regular university if he or she had the choice.
Len Hatfield:
Here's another worry: what about admissions and "quality
control"? I'm hearing from
several quarters the notion that Tech needs to reach out to new groups of
students;
but at the same time, our current admissions requirements are heavily
skewed to the
students well prepared for engineering/science studies. Many "non
traditional" students
haven't such preparation, but might be ideal candidates for distance
learning courses.
Is the university willing to adjust its admissions policies?
Edward A. Fox (Ed):
We know little about how students' characteristics relate to the quality of
their
learning experience. How do we develop prediction schemes so that we know
better
how to deal with particular types of students, in different learning
situations?
Or how to decide what types of support to provide?
Chuck Clifton:
A distinction between "distance learning" and "automated
education" must be made.
I would assert distance learning as an educational model that provides
educational
opportunities to remote cites that have no other access to the given
program of study.
Automated education is a more general application of technology to
replace/augment current
teaching models. In the article from Chronicles . . . which we were
discussing,
it is emphasized by the AFT that higher administration and government
officials are
pushing automated education in the name of distance education to reduce
costs of educating.
As educators, a line should be drawn for these administrators to preserve
the quality
of education.
Len Hatfield:
Valerie: yes, I think so too (that students might well want to attend
regular courses
when possible), but methinks DL aims at those who can't for various
reasons...
Tom Head:
I would agree that it is not "either/or". We will continue to
have students who prefer
to come to a residential campus if they can afford the time and money.
TeleTechnet
is appealing to nontraditional students (for example, single mothers with
"youngens") who are unable to come to campus.
Len Hatfield:
Seems like one of things we were getting toward earlier is the suggestion
that students
might need to learn how to learn on-campus before they're set loose in DL.
. .would
this work?
Edward A. Fox (Ed):
Do we have the same expectations for local and distant students in terms of
grading?
Do we make it easier for students afar, to compensate for the problems /
disadvantages
they face? Do we spend more (time, resources,...) on them to equalize the
quality
of teaching?
Valerie Hardcastle:
I worry about opening the doors too widely to the "non
traditional" students. I say
this only as a philosopher of mind who has to deal regularly with the coots
and crazies
of the world who want to "do metaphysics." What sort of
standards we would bring
to bear to admitting NT students is very important.
Len Hatfield:
There's also the idea of "down streaming" our assessment
processes...we need to know
not only how students respond to a given class, but how that class and the
facts/skills
learned there look in a year or two. . .
Chris Eustis:
Proposition two is not wise. It would seem that one of the greatest benefits of "distance
education" is to undergraduate
students on campus, especially as a supplement to regular courses and as a
way of
breaking the credit-for-contact mold.
Remaining competitive is important and is likely to be more so in the
future. However
this should not be the principal reason for implementing such a program;
educational
benefits are paramount.
Downsizing in faculty is not necessarily bad, if the quality of education
can be maintained
and even enhanced by putting the funding to use in other (technological)
ways. Why
would these programs cause a downsizing in facilities; what facilities?
Does this refer to a reduction in the number of students coming to campus
for on-site education,
and thus the facilities could
be reduced too? I think the benefits on on-campus education are unique and
cannot
simply be replaced by distance education, but we may need to make the case
better
for the value of the on-campus experience.
Edward A. Fox (Ed):
We are building communities in cyberspace. How well does that transfer to
building
communities of scholars? To helping students function in future jobs and
careers,
where they will probably work in groups? Are we helping people to
communicate better,
or disadvantaging more those who can't write
Len Hatfield:
Chuck makes a good point: we do need to distinguish between automated and
distance
ed; but I suspect, too, that we need to think in more mixed terms still: a
"class"
might provide students with a full range of learning experiences, some
automated,
some not; some distance, others immediate...
Tom Head:
Question: Why are fewer than 50% of students enrolled in higher education
in a residential
setting?
Valerie Hardcastle:
Are there any data out there about how many students we might be losing if
we don't
have a DL program? (E.g. how many mothers with wee ones are there who
qualify for
admission to Tech who want to come but can't?) NOTE: I ask this not
because I am
skeptical that mothers can learn, but because I have no feel for the
statistics. What sort
of population is this?
Len Hatfield:
Ed: probably part of the issue (advantaging/disadvantaging) is being
dictated by current
tech frames--text-based interaction is readily available, other forms much
less so.
At the same time, as an English teacher, I'd have to argue that part of
the appeal in much of this is that it helps those who "can't
write" to learn and practice the
skills of writing...
Chuck Clifton:
As with all technology, the long term effects of proliferated distance ed
programs
must be considered. Some feel that technology already precludes much
needed social
interaction. As a former resident advisor, I am reminded of the Residence
Education
motto that university/college is where you learn about yourself and others
as well as
earn a bachelor's degree. If distance ed becomes "too" popular,
will it lead to
a socially excommunicated ripple in our society?
Tom Head:
I do not have the data regarding the population base of students who cannot
come to
campus, but who are qualified to be admitted as a HOKIE.
Edward A. Fox (Ed):
We are demanding faculty to have more and more skills. Will we become
masters of
no skills as this continues? Should we have more specialization, where
some faculty
spend time developing courseware that others deliver, and that others
provide tutoring
on? Does DL exaggerate the need for this?
Valerie Hardcastle:
Easy answer, Tom: lack of money (it is more expensive), lack of space
(there aren't
enough dorms, etc. to meet current demand), lack of control of free time
(reisdential
housing is more restrictive).
Len Hatfield:
Tom: does that figure cover all the urban schools where students are
'residential'
in that they attend classes etc, but not in terms of where they live? It
would
seem to me that such "non-res" students are really still 'immediate' rather than
distance learners...
Tom Head:
Len: These data are often quoted in the literature without teasing out the
questions
you are answering. I have always assumed that these were students who were
not enrolled
in a residential setting, but shame on me for not having my ducks in a row
on this.
Valerie Hardcastle:
I worry that maybe much of this discussion will be for naught. Certainly
Ed's course
has a population base, and I feel confident that when he gets the tech.
problems
solved it will be a success, but I am unsure how many studnets woudl be
able to profit
from a serious DL program.
Edward A. Fox (Ed):
One proposal I have seen is that the world spend $10B to develop
interactive multimedia
courseware for college, a comprehensive set. Everyone then use that, and we
stop
all the experimentation and floundering of faculty trying to do what a
professional
ed. tech. group with content experts will do better
Chris Eustis:
Tom, what do you mean when you say that fewer than 50% of students are
enrolled on
campus? Is it the case that the other 50% presently is enrolled in
distance education?
If so, then I would like to know why they have chosen the distance mode
and also
what their level of satisfaction and performance is compared with the
on-campus students.
Do you know of any data on this?
Chuck Clifton:
In addition to requiring more skills from the faculty, more skills are
being required
of the students. In some of the literature I have read, surveys reveal a
subset
of distance learners that feel they had to learn the medium of education
before they
could learn the material of the course. For many, particularly in intro.
courses, the
course itself is intimidating enough.
Len Hatfield:
Ed: as to the question of whether we need re-specialization, I'd say no--in
fact,
most of the pedagogical and critical theory I've been reading the past 15
years argues
strenuously against that very process of "disciplining" us as
faculty research teaching subjects. I suspect, in fact, that DL might
encourage the crossing of disciplinary
boundaries in the way that itinerant ministers had to become multiply
talented folks
out on their circuits. . .DL strikes me as a sort of virtual frontier in
this way,
where adaptability and flexibility would be survival skills.
Valerie Hardcastle:
But, Ed, that assumes (1) knowledge remains constant, so tht wht yo urpduce
this month
will be current next month, (2) everyone's learning style is the same, (3)
there
is ONE PROGRAM that constitutes an education.
Tom Head:
Question: Is there a way to distinguish the rich environment of a
residential experience
(social maturation, athletic events, etc.) from learning in the disciplines?
Edward A. Fox (Ed):
Why do we focus on using lectures in DL situations, when we know they are
worse than
in person lectures. Why not abandon that model altogether, and have
multimedia materials,
carefully prepared, with high interactivity. Have peer tutors, teaching
assistants to really individualize.
Valerie Hardcastle:
Good point Ed!!
Tom Head:
Ed: I would agree that your description would enhance learning (we have
been doing
bad TV lectures for at least 30 years), but I suspect it is the development
cost
for your model that is circumscribing the rate of development.
Valerie Hardcastle:
I suspect the problem of the students having the requisite skills will
disappear over
time. Already, I notice a difference in my students in the short time I
have been
doing electronic courses here.
Chris Eustis:
I agree that Ed makes a good point. From what Tom said about students
preferring
to just get the video tapes it would seem that developing really good
interactivity
is essential to the success of distance learning that goes beyond the
traditional
lecture.
Edward A. Fox (Ed):
Chuck, Len - are we making all this too complicated for everyone? Are we loosing the
learning in cyberspace, and dehumanizing at the same time? Why not have
each faculty
meet 15 minutes each week with each student individually, and in 9 person
groups
1 hour, and have project-based learning
Len Hatfield:
Ed: the model of multimedia interactive materials supported by lower paid
assistants
for individualization seems to be the core of the TeleTechnet project at
ODU. There
are some serious ethical problems with this, I think (it looks like a form
of exploitation of teachers lower on the totem pole), and there's also the
issue of trying to
find a way for students to make the most of your (or my) years of
learning/researching/teaching
experience. These elements are what draw students to want to learn at the
"feet" of the lofty professorials. . .
Valerie Hardcastle:
That would be great Ed. Now explain how I am going to teach my class of
230 this
semester.
Len Hatfield:
I'm interested in project based learning; but then we'd HAVE to reconfigure
the entire
faculty assessment/reward structure, no?
Tom Head:
Len: I think the current model for ODU TeleTechnet is TV lectures on
satellite.
Valerie Hardcastle:
I believe that my course, though cyberized, actually enhances learning and
increases
the sense of learning community. You don't need small groups meeting
together to
learn and feel a part.
Chuck Clifton:
Since I am new to this field of distance learning, I would like to know:
What do
the theories of cognitive psychology and other learning theories say about
distance
education? How do these disciplines feel about technology as either an
augmentation
and/or substitute for traditional lecture based courses?
Valerie Hardcastle:
Chuck, it is too early to tell yet, I think.
Tom Head:
Chuck: We need an expert like Terry Wildman (College of Education) to
answer your
question. In fact, I believe he is working such a paper for the Advisory
Committee
on Continuing Education which is currently looking very hard at DL.
Len Hatfield:
Valerie: to return to admissions for sec, yeah, I agree that one wants to
have some
gateways to weed out the cranks, but I also think there are 1,000s of
students who
don't fit the heavy math/science template in our region who'd make
excellent students--different in kind as well as quality. I suspect that
Tech needs to sort this out before
it gets very far along in the outreach mode, y'kno?
Valerie Hardcastle:
Reconfiguring the rewards structure for teaching would be a plus, in my
book. Now
we just record student evaluation scores. Surely there is more to
evaluating teaching
than that!! (Distance or not)
Edward A. Fox (Ed):
Valerie, The $10B solution would involve highly interactive course
material, designed
to allow for all feasible learning styles, and would be updated regularly.
The Open
University comes closest to this. Do we really need so many courses here -
we could
do better overall by making key courses better, and having real-life
projects to apply
those courses.
Len Hatfield:
Tom: yes, I know; but don't they also assume that teaching assistants and
the like
will be standing by to answer phoned in questions etc in response to those
TV satellite
lectures?
Valerie Hardcastle:
Agreed, Len. But that is a long and different row to hoe.
Valerie Hardcastle:
I don't know Ed. Real life projects work well in engineering and computer
science
and such. They work less well in philosophy, history, music, literature,
etc. Part
of learning is learning about your culture and shouldn't need to be
connected to
the "real" world.
Len Hatfield:
Valerie: yep; I'm not sure though that proponents of dl can treat it as
such a different
row, given our likely audiences. If we leave that one to hoe itself, then
we're
dealing w/pretty much the same audiences we have already, I guess....and outreach
drops by the wayside.
Tom Head:
Ed: It appears you have been reading too much of the education literature
for your
own good. How many of your colleagues would agree to reduce content and
substitute
a real-life project based curriculum?
Bill Galloway:
Response to Ed's10 billion dollar plan:
Martin Heidegger once said that students and teachers were different only
in the following
respect: teachers have much more to learn than their students.
A "packaged" curriculum assumes that teachers teach, learners
learn; but shouldn't
teachers often be learners, and vice versa.
According to Issac Asimov, one of the prerequisites for
"learning" is the desire to
teach.
Edward A. Fox (Ed):
Is the heart of the matter excitement? We want the students to be excited
about learning,
and faculty excited about teaching / facilitating learning. If faculty
could be
trained so that their investments of time and energy are as effective as
possible
given the situation, would exciting DL then work?
Valerie Hardcastle:
I guess my point though was that there are any "key" courses.
There are only key
courses relative to particular individual in a particular course of study,
with particular
interests.
Valerie Hardcastle:
I hear you Len. I think you are right. We getting a large package here:
different
evaluation procedure, different outreach, different admissions, different
courses.
Edward A. Fox (Ed):
Projects - EE and CS and others are discussing project-based learning as
key to the
future, with people working in Virtual Corporations. This will become more
popular
in Eng. here very soon. In music, people perform, compose - those are
projects.
In literature, people write. In history, people write historical analyses
or historical novels.
Aren't all these a type of project and can't we handle those well with DL,
videoconferences?
Valerie Hardcastle:
Could we sell a complete overhaul of everything, or should we try to do
things piece-meal
in small bites?
Chuck Clifton:
Why are we even discussing distance learning? Is it to keep up with the
ODUs or is
there evidence that current methods are lacking? In reference to ODU's
individual
investment, it is worth noting that many schools are entering this market
through
cooperative consortia. In fact, there is a large belief that individual
efforts will fail
since this type of education requires a large investment to be successful.
In addition,
this collusive behavior provides a larger demand for these expensive
services (each school contributes to the market demand). Has/will Tech
investigate(d) participation
in such a consortium?
Valerie Hardcastle:
All those are projects, and I think project-based learning is good. What I
was disagreeing
with was the "real life" part, the idea that everything we do has
to somehow feed
into the students' future jobs. I like keeping the spirit of a liberal
education
alive.
Edward A. Fox (Ed):
I talked with the Head of CS at ODU. He would like to have a meeting of ODU
and Virginia
Tech folks interested in DL, sharing our ideas and approaches. Can we
cooperate with
them? Do you think we have the same base values so that overall, quality
of DL in Virginia would improve?
Tom Head:
Ed: I do think we need to cooperate with ODU. If TeleTechnet is a good
idea ($9
M) was allocated to it, why is it not a state-wide effort?