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.



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?