DL Models (draft )
DL characteristics and supporting theories .......................................................................... 1
Evaluation Criteria .......................................................................................................................... 3
Examples/Scenarios ....................................................................................................................... 4
Summary of UH models ............................................................................................................ 4
UH Creative and Cultural Industries .................................................................................... 7
UH Computer Science ............................................................................................................. 10
UH Education ............................................................................................................................. 13
UH Engineering ......................................................................................................................... 15
UH Nursing ................................................................................................................................. 17
UH Life Sciences ........................................................................................................................ 19
UH Law ......................................................................................................................................... 21
External DL Models ................................................................................................................. 23
UK OU ....................................................................................................................................... 23
UK Leicester........................................................................................................................... 24
US models ............................................................................................................................... 24
Other models: ............................................................................................................................ 25
DL design criteria, considerations, issues and barriers for adoption ....................... 27
Future formations for quality DL ............................................................................................ 29
References ....................................................................................................................................... 29
DL characteristics and supporting theories
DL characteristics:
 separation of teacher and learner in space or time
 control of learning by students
 non-contiguous communication between student and teacher
 convenience as a main criteria for choosing DL programs
DL delivery methods/terminology:
 Correspondence courses/schools
 Independent study
 Computer-based instructions
 Computer-assisted instructions
 Computer-mediated communications
 Video courses
 Videoconferencing
 Web-based instruction
 Online learning
Distance learning and e-learning concepts overlap; DL is considered to be mainly
on-line based, with some or none of the teaching offered F2F
Technologies used:
1




Audioconfrencing, video conferencing, computer conferencing, virtual
classrooms, TV, Internet
First generation web tools: chat rooms, email, discussion boards
Second generation web tools: wikis, blogs, podcasts (vlogs and audiologs),
rss
Social networking tools fro real-time collaboration: instaColl, Writeboard,
Imeem, facebook, ning
Different time
Same time
Different place
Online asynchronous
Online synchronous
Same place
NA (shifts, WBL)
F2F, traditional
classroom
Applicable learning models/pedagogy:
 Objectivist model (teaching as a transmission of knowledge, learning as
understanding and knowledge retention)
 Constructivist model (learner-centred, through construction of
knowledge)
 Cooperative model (knowledge is created as it is shared, participation is
critical)
 Socio constructivism (learning takes place as a social activity, teacher
facilitates the process of learning; modelling expertise will enable others
to become experts themselves)
 Connectivism (learning as a process of creating connections between
different information stores)
 Situated learning theory – real life problem solving through collaboration,
empowering students to become part of a learning community
 Engagement theory – collaborative efforts, project based learning, and
non-academic interactions lead to engagement and authentic learning
 Theory of independent study
Learning and teaching approaches:
 PBL,
 experiential learning (learning by doing, experiencing)
 inquiry learning (facilitate of discovery learning through progressive
discourse) , anchored instructions (building problems solving skill
through anchoring instructions around a situation or a problem)
 contribution-oriented pedagogy allows students to use and re-sue what
others have produced as a part of their learning process and contribute to
the knowledge base of the group; leading to communities of practice
Symbiotic relation between technology and pedagogy (Wheller, 2009)
2
Some models can be a combination of different types across different
components of the course (lecture, tutorial, assessment, out-of-class learning,
office-hours) E.g. SOCS tutored elearning has the following structure:
Lecture: online asynch
Tutorial: CB
Assessment: online synch (test, online viva etc)
Office hours: CB ? (local tutor)
Out of class learning : not structured?
Different models can be described using the table below:
OA
OS
F2F (OFS/ONS)
Lecture
Tutorial
Supervision
Assessment
Office hours
Structured
Self learning
The above content should be put in the context of 150 hours of learning required
for a 15 credit module
Evaluation Criteria
Evaluation Criteria should be based on C&G principles for implementing new
technologies in DL programs
encourages contact between students and faculty,
develops reciprocity and cooperation among students,
encourages active learning,
gives prompt feedback,
emphasizes time on task,
communicates high expectations, and
respects diverse talents and ways of learning
Learning effectiveness measures:
 Grades (same results?)
 NSS and student Satisfaction (CB students more satisfied than in
technology mediated environment?)
 Own perception of learning and skill development (more positive for DL
than CB students)
3




Ease of interactions (higher level of interaction leads to more positive
attitude, engagement, decreased anxiety involved with self-presentation,
more participation forum quiet students, increase in female participation
in the on-line class discussions) but lack of facial expressions, body
language etc.
Engagement and participation
Perceived flexibility (important consideration, individual flexible teaching
model, one of the main advantages of DL )
Retention rate (worst for DL students?)
Examples/Scenarios
UH models:
Business School
Creative and Cultural Industries
Computer Science
Education
Engineering
Nursing
Life Sciences
Law
DL and research methods and
dissertations supervision
On-line
On-line and tutored e-learning
Flexible online
Work based learning
Fly in faculty
Distance learning with residential
workshops
Online based on classroom interactions
Summary of UH models
See (separate excel file)
4
UH Business School
Contact: John Hobson (program tutor)
Program: MSc in Strategic Business Information Systems (dissertations only)
Aimed at: oversea students wishing to obtain MSc qualification from UH
(different countries – different rules for contact time)
Program established in 2008/9, 28 students to date all OS
New intake in January 10
BS-DIS
Lecture
Tutorial
Supervision
Assessment
Office hours
Structured
Self learning
OA
OS


F2F
ONS
ONS&OFS
Models:
Students come to UK to be taught Research Methods and meet their supervisors.
Three more visits schedules and one supervisor visits overseas
No teaching, except supporting modules (research methods, LRC etc)
Assessment: dissertation submitted directly or via StudyNet






Lecture – none/except research methods
Tutorials – none
Structured self-study–none set by the tutor;
Office hours – email
Assessment –dissertation directly or via StudyNet
Supervision – F2F visits -both ways
Technology used: Very limited use of StudyNet (mainly for e-mails)
No teaching materials
Pedagogy – Experiential learning? PBL? XXX
Learning effectiveness measures:
Grades: NA
Satisfaction: NA
Drop out rate: NA
5
C&G
encourages contact between students
and faculty,
develops reciprocity and cooperation
among students,
communication via e-mail
encourages active learning,
gives prompt feedback,
emphasizes time on task,
communicates high expectations, and
NA
NA
NA
possibly, through offering v. little
support?
Possibly? suitable for self-motivated
students
respects diverse talents and ways of
learning
NA (is there any contact between
students on the same program?)
Drivers and barriers for engaging teaching staff:
- opportunities for part-time staff, retirement etc
- travel opportunities
Example module site: XXX
Extra: Offsite visits and dissertation collection through a local agent.
6
UH Creative and Cultural Industries
Contact: Sally Freshwater , S.Freshwater@herts.ac.uk x5322
Program: MA Online Graphic Design, MA Illustration, PT option only (2y)
Product Design 3D modeling. (no stud)
This is our online choices within the MA Art & Design (overall umbrella)
Aimed at inter stud (originally) but also attracting small num of home students
¾ are Ho
Program established in ,2007/8 students to date 8(int)-11(all Ho) + 4 this year
Low uptake due to no visibility
BS-DIS
Lecture
Tutorial
Supervision
Assessment
Office hours
Structured
Self learning
OA




OS
F2F




Models:
Students upload work at Flicr/Facebook – skype/facebook chat for discussion
Problem with tactile subjects such as textile and fine art (Middlesex runs textiles
with F2F)
Theory – disc forum on SN
Practice - BB
SN not helpful size problem
Assessment:






Lecture –
Tutorials –
Structured self-study
Office hours –
Assessment –
Supervision –
7
Technology used: all of the above (Barbara Brownie knows more about) email
(Middlesex using skype for the tutorials) BB
No teaching materials : SN, links to relevant websites
Pedagogy – same as for f2f programs, but not always
Series of guest speaker lectures recorded and uploaded on SN
Improved exp for DL stud (recorded)
No interaction between CB and DL
Learning effectiveness measures:
Grades: 1 repeat,
Satisfaction: SFQ for DL
Drop out rate: none
Assessment – same as f2f (put on the web), own website, written material
2 form assess – stud given feedback
C&G
encourages contact between students
and faculty,
develops reciprocity and cooperation
among students,
encourages active learning,
gives prompt feedback,
Emphasizes time on task,
communicates high expectations, and
respects diverse talents and ways of
learning
First point of cont prog leader & prog
tutor, emails, flicr comments, facebook
chat
Awareness, dialogue, disc forums
Points towards res inf sources they are
using to take on a live project (creative
and ent module)
Same as
Ask BB (contact time + self-dir
learning)
Live project
Stud accepted based on portfolio an
objectives e.g we don’ teach techniques
but dev of ind practice, supported and
guided through skill modules, creative
ventures and enterprise, prog tutor acts
as a pers tutor
Drivers and barriers for engaging teaching staff:
- very time-consuming
- BB does only that
- Tutors not sure if it is the right way of doing it (difficult to simulate
creative proc online)
- Current wkl model not adequate.
- BB is PhD student
8
-
Fit in studio practice (online disc with stud ) – part of the way she want to
operate her teaching practice.
Example module site: NA
9
UH Computer Science
Contacts:
Mariette Berkhout. 01707 284329 M.Berkhout@herts.ac.uk,
Andrew Piper, e-learning technologist, PhD student in e-learning, developer of
the new frwk
http://www.feis.herts.ac.uk/csonline/
Program established since 2004, 1000 students and 450 graduates to date.
High income generator (nearly 1M£ since 2004)
Models:
 Online direct
 Tutored e-learning
Online direct = 100% asynchronous online
CS-OD
Lecture
Tutorial
Supervision
Assessment
Office hours
Structured
Self learning







OA






OS
F2F



Student body – mix from different countries
Lecture – material, tasks, activities posted on the StudyNet (new frwk
starting to be used for the lecture materials)
Tutorials – asynchronous via studynet (discussions, blogs etc) ,
elluminate session, video-based demos
Out of class learning – structured via tasks and weekly objectives
Office hours – don’t exist, on-line asynch comms (email)
Assessment – CW submission via StudyNet, on-line tests (QM), Eluminate
/Skype vivas
Tutored e-learning = 50% asynchronous online + 50% CB (tutorials)
CS-TE
Lecture
Tutorial
Supervision
Assessment
Office hours
Structured
Self learning
OA

OS
F2F
OFS






OFS
10






Student body – same country
Lecture – material, tasks, activities posted on the StudyNet (new frwk
starting to be used for the lecture materials)
Tutorials – CB with local tutor support
Out of class learning – structured via tasks and weekly objectives
(schedule on the SN)
Office hours – don’t exist, on-line asynch comms (email)
Assessment – CW submission via StudyNet, on-line tests (QM),
Eluminate/Skype vivas
Technology used: StudyNet (mainly) , QM, Skype, Elluminate, new frwk (XXX ask
AP), Facebook chat, discussions and wall posting used by Business Intelligence
Online to support the group work
DL Materials developed by ELT from the existing CB materials
DL materials starting to be used for CB programmes as well (just started, offered
selectively to CB students who cannot complete the course otherwise)
Pedagogy – 3way framework : narratives, LRs, tasks (XXX ask AP)
Learning effectiveness measures:
 Grades: better DL results (motivation factor)
 Satisfaction: tutored eLearning students report high level of satisfaction
with the program (“changed my life”, “lead to promotion” etc)
 Drop out rate: 10%
C&G
encourages contact between students
and faculty,
develops reciprocity and cooperation
among students,
encourages active learning,
gives prompt feedback,
emphasizes time on task,
communicates high expectations, and
respects diverse talents and ways of
learning
daily communication via e-mail
class discussion on units, discussion
group “meeting rooms”
NA
NA
weekly tasks set, tutor scheduled
activities (e.g. BIO and the use of
Facebook - 5 tasks on FB, one group
task, two individual tasks)
NA
NA
Drivers and barriers for engaging teaching staff:
- some prefer f2f contact
- some prefer flexibility
- opportunities for part-time staff, retirement etc
11
Example module site: 3COM0108, 3BUS0292, 3BUS0287 (Business
Intehttp://www.facebook.com/group.php?v=info&gid=125505026138 )
12
UH Education
Contact: Eric Dell, Sarah Smith – flexible route leader
Program: PGCE (Primary) & BEd Mathematics
Aimed at
 teachers from two teacher training institutes in Malaysia (BEd
Mathematics)
 trainee primary school teachers (PGCE (Primary)) distance learning
flexible route
Program established in XXX, 120 (70) students in 08/09 all OS (EU/OS)
Uptake same
Models:
Malaysia (end) – campus based, our teachers go over there twice a year for 1-3
weeks to teach teachers, moderate marks, develop degree (DMD, module
guides). Modules delivered by local teachers (not really an example of DL)
Future: design on-line degree for Mal students.
Flexible learning – same material as for the CB students - presented differently
Combination of CB (induction weekend/subject introduction (3h/subject)+ that
coincide with CB students + extended weekend in Easter for DL students only)
and online activities
ENG-WBL
Lecture
OA

OS
F2F

Tutorial
Supervision
Assessment
Office hours
Structured
Self learning









Technology used: SN and additional proprietary framework for teaching online
training based on SN, phone, and messenger
Pedagogy – “transmission model” supported by activities (experiential based
learning) with some elements of collaborative learning (discussions)
Learning effectiveness measures:
13
Grades: NA
Satisfaction: NA (positive OFSTED inspection data)
Deliberate choice to study that way, tailoring their study, NA
(Sarah Smith – flexible route leader)
Drop out rate: NA
C&G
encourages contact between students
and faculty,
develops reciprocity and cooperation
among students,
encourages active learning,
gives prompt feedback,
emphasizes time on task,
communicates high expectations, and
respects diverse talents and ways of
learning
F2F induction/Easter meetings/emails
Tutors go online and support students
via discussion forums (discuss this
topic on the discussion area) - same
used for CB students;
3 assignments and tutorials with
personal tutor (email, phone,
messenger)
Encouraged students to engage in
discussion on particular teaching
resource (topic), wikis and blogs used
but not as much as discussion area
NA
NA
All units are broken into tasks that are
timed (adding up to 300 hours)
NA
Flexible duration :12/15/18 months
program
Drivers and barriers for engaging teaching staff: NA
Example module site: MEDU0364/362 (363 is CB)
14
UH Engineering
Contact: David Pearce & Matthew Haringtton (new programme tutor)
Program: MSc in Professional Engineering (based on UKSpec designed by Eng
Council
Aimed at work-based learners wishing to obtain Chartered Engineer status
Program established in XXX, 3 students to date all HO.
Low uptake
ENG-WBL
Lecture
Tutorial
Supervision
Assessment
Office hours
Structured
Self learning
OA
OS


F2F


ONS&OFS
Models:
WBL with limited f2f and on-line (email) contact time (supervision) : 12
hours+extra time for emails& reading
No teaching, except if the learning outcomes cannot be achieved through WBL,
taught modules are offered (SN learning materials)
Assessment : report & portfolio submitted directly or via StudyNet






Lecture – none/possible to use taught modules for some objectives
Tutorials – none/possible to use taught modules for some objectives
Structured self-study–none set by the tutor; Audit program – students
describes how he is going to address each of the modules (approved by
modules/program leader + external examiner)
Office hours – email
Assessment – report & portfolio submitted directly or via StudyNet
Supervision – F2F visits - both ways
Technology used: Very limited use of StudyNet (mainly for e-mails)
No teaching materials
Pedagogy – Experiential learning? PBL?
Learning effectiveness measures:
15
Grades: NA
Satisfaction: ?
Drop out rate: ?
C&G
encourages contact between students
and faculty,
develops reciprocity and cooperation
among students,
communication via e-mail
encourages active learning,
gives prompt feedback,
emphasizes time on task,
communicates high expectations, and
NA
NA
NA
possibly, through offering v. little
support?
possibly suitable for self-motivated
students
respects diverse talents and ways of
learning
NA (no contact between students on
the same program?)
Drivers and barriers for engaging teaching staff:
- opportunities for part-time staff, retirement etc
Example module site: NA
16
UH Nursing
Contact: Irene Anderson
Program BSc Tissue viability (only one module)
BSc in Clinical Nursing (fly in faculty)
Aimed at increased flexibility for UK/Europe students flexibility (CPD)
Program established in 2007/8, 20 students to date all UK/Europe
Same uptake
Module short course code (XXX)
Models:
ENG-WBL
Lecture
Tutorial
Supervision
Assessment
Office hours
Structured
Self learning
OA

OS
F2F

Assessment:
All by c/w case-study based on the patient (ass brief, formative ass – designed to
start them planning, start them off reading, provide refs)






Lecture –
Tutorials –
Structured self-study–
Office hours –
Assessment –
Supervision –
Technology used: SN, skype, podcasting, potentially elluminate, video (mostly
practice-based developed by the team – video of bandaging)
No teaching materials
Pedagogy – experiential learning, no collaborative learning (no sufficient
numbers of the core group, students starting at diff time)
Learning effectiveness measures:
Grades:
Satisfaction:
17
Drop out rate:
Monitor use of SN, use form ass, check bi-weekly via skype
C&G
encourages contact between students
and faculty,
develops reciprocity and cooperation
among students,
encourages active learning,
gives prompt feedback,
emphasizes time on task,
communicates high expectations, and
respects diverse talents and ways of
learning
Offer various ways of contacting, ask to
feedback on each pack – to got the
conversation going
Logistics problem,
Could be done via mentors at the work
place/they don’t feel isolated, but we
feel they will benefit from working
together
By relating to the practice
Formative fdbck within 2 days (aim) +
dialogue (one-to-one relationship_
Thee is a guidance doc that sets out
time for each package, not for the final
piece of c/w (but not able to leave it till
the last minute)
By feedback, relating to the practice,
asking them to report on diff that it
made in their practice, role modelling
our students (publications developed
by other students in the nursing
journals)
Doing that really well – poor language
skills and academic skill, have to help
them develop, English lang support
Drivers and barriers for engaging teaching staff:
Example module site: NA
18
UH Life Sciences
Contact: (Dr Sherael Webley S.Webley@herts.ac.uk)
Program: PgC/PgD/MSc Pharmacovigilance (120cr)
Aimed at working practitioners who need to complete drug safety training
Program established in 1996, 150 students in total 50% HO others mainly EU
and some OS (Japan)
Increasing uptake every year - limit to 50/per module
Model:
For each module: first 6 weeks – self study (students given reading materials) +
3days short course to assess the understanding of the reading - includes two
assessments: MCQ (test pre-course reading) and group w/shop (PBL) +
8 weeks – self study and preparation of the final assignment (50% of module
mark) – completely self-managed no checkpoints/milestones, except for weaker
students (per demand)
For each module 6+8 weeks of self-study and 3 days of F2F w/shops
(4 times per year F2F)
ENG-WBL
Lecture
Tutorial
Supervision
Assessment
Office hours
Structured
Self learning
OA

 (Email)


On demand

OS
F2F




Assessment :





Lecture – no classical lectures; instead reading material places on the
studyNet
Tutorials – all during the F2F mini-conference
Structured self-study– structured only via reading list (no specific
learning tasks)
Office hours – per demand/via email
Assessment – One MCQ, one group work, one individual essay
19

Supervision – Each student doing a project has an UH and industry
supervisor
Technology used: SN (reading list, assessment, email), ‘Manual’
teleconferencing
Teaching materials: SN
Pedagogy – PBL, experiential learning
Learning effectiveness measures:
Grades: NA
Satisfaction: Own SFQ – student centred program, students highly
motivated as expected to report back at their workplace
Drop out rate: NA
C&G
encourages contact between students
and faculty,
develops reciprocity and cooperation
among students,
encourages active learning,
gives prompt feedback,
emphasizes time on task,
communicates high expectations, and
respects diverse talents and ways of
learning
3 day course setup as a conference;
formal and informal means for
interactions; adult learners - less
barrier between students/teachers;
Email
No need for anything else
Second part of assessment is a group
based w/shop (groups of up to 5 )
Students purposefully not introduced
before the w/shop
Emailing between students after the
short course but nothing setup by the
tutor/formal
Pre-course reading/after course
research
Annotated essays,
After the w/shop go through
standard/sample answers
Pre-course test: answers provided
NA
Highly motivated learners (see above)
the varied amount of assessment
supports different types of learners
Drivers and barriers for engaging teaching staff:
- Teaching staff mainly from industry (visiting lecturers) - only one
module taught by UH member
Example module site: MLFS0049
20
UH Law
Contact: Karen Clark, CABLE 4 team leader
Program: GDL
Aimed at providing consistent and vibrant on-line experience to CB and DL
students
Program established in 2007 (FT in 2008) XX students to date OS/HO=PT
Increased uptake (70 students this year, 20 more than last year
Model:
Four modules running in a campus based session for 3 hours (lecture/seminar
or w/shop), lecture-part are recorded and sometimes plenary part at the end
Or other aspects (ask the group to produce an essay plan) – any obvious
outcomes of the group work
The session is uploaded on the SN immediately, in addition to the written
material and everyone gets an outline of discussion questions/answers
(seminar questions)
DL students post on disc forum, more often email or phone call
Published material: Module guide contains: outline of the session + series of
activities (problem areas)
Assessment same for DL and CB students (piece of formative assessment e.g.
timed essay + summative ass 1000% exam or 30+70)
Eight modules is 4000 word mini-dissertation (own research)
0 credit initial module has lots of structure activities in it - English legal system
(+ skills)
ENG-WBL
Lecture
Tutorial
Supervision
OA


Assessment

Office hours
Structured
Self learning

OS
F2F
By phone
ONS (for few
local students)
 (OFS in the
council) or
ONS for local
students
 (ell)
21
Technology used: SN, audio/podcast, Elluminate for rev session (just couple of
times) and for office hours
Teaching materials posted on the SN
Pedagogy – new project established to maximize student experience and move
away from the transmission model to more collaborative (the recruitment
process should explain the rules of engagement from both sides)
Learning effectiveness measures (not enough data = FT DL two graduates last
year)
Grades: NA, achievement seem to be comparable, some of the campus
based switch to DL model (to confuse the matter)
Satisfaction: usually high comments, but difficult to administer
Drop out rate: NA (because of intensively, some DL FT with to DL PT
mode)
DL subgroup for each module contains the list of all DLs
Model is everything for everybody
C&G
encourages contact between students
and faculty,
develops reciprocity and cooperation
among students,
encourages active learning,
gives prompt feedback,
emphasizes time on task,
communicates high expectations, and
respects diverse talents and ways of
learning
Local invited to public events and
evening lectures
Intro pack includes career videos
Socializing stuff at the beginning
Email
Pastoral support
Post the bit about themselves (intro
module)
Collaborative activities between CB and
DL students
New project about encouraging that
Everyone gets feedback on SN quizzes,
the way the questions are structured
Vie response to email enquires,
anonymize emails and post them on DF,
telephone, quick turnaround, audio
feedback (recorded comments)
MG contains session outline
Type of activities
The aim is to provide quality expert for
both DL and CB students – need to
articulate why is it better way of
engaging
Drivers and barriers for engaging teaching staff:
Lots of anxiety about technical diff & workload
22
But people like teaching on the program and there is a number of staff who are
interested in doing things in a different and new way, thinking about improving
the experience for both CB and DL students,.
Example module site: NA
External DL Models
Basic classification
 Iowa model: offer DL similar experience as to CB students via virtual
classrooms and audio-visual interactions
 Norwegian model: combining computer mediated distance teaching with
local f2f teaching
UK OU
Established in 1971, by 1996 257000 students and 25000 non-uk (fourth largest
UK HE institution)











Mixed media model of teaching (print material, broadcasts, video and
audio, on-line tutoring) with provision for locally organized f2f tuition.
Some foundation courses incorporate week long summer schools
‘Rolls Royce’ model of provision: large course teams working to 2-3 year
lead periods with educational technologists, on-site artists, editors, oncampus BBC studio
13 regional centres in UK (for local tutorials) – tutorial participation
voluntary after Y1 , residential tutors mainly ft lecturers at other
universities, regional centres provide examination facilities
association with BBC , subtracted to produce educational radio and tv
programs
printed text produced by university staff
most courses have on-line tutoring and multimedia work, but mainly for
technology-related subjects
open entry to UG course s (first come basis)
course portfolio arranged at four levels of difficulties (modular education)
– increased flexibility and responsiveness to student needs
international expansion in collaboration with Institute of Mgmt of
Singapore, Open Learning institute in Hong Kong, Western Governors
University, universities in Florida and California (CSU)
Established OU of US
Changing – considering 5 different business models
23
Case-study ( T171, Computer and the Net, largest for credit on-line course in
Europe)




Large Web-site (800 pages) including professionally designed 10
animations, small video clips; plus associated CMC environment
including conferencing;
Navigation through ‘what next’,’visual course map’ (middle on tech axis,
as aimed at broad audience with different access capabilities)
Pedagogy: group activities, debates, reflection, collaborative exercises
(middle between didactic and constructivists, because of the type of
students – returning students)
Large scale course – using a number of PT tutors to support smaller
groups (discussion forums, online help, email, FAQ,
UK Leicester
Established DL MBA in 1989. DL range now includes general and HR MBAs, MA
and MBA in sports management, MBA in educational management, MAs in
international law, mass communications, museum studies, psychology, etc





Mainly international and mixed HO/OS audiences in collaboration with
commercial agents
Focus on niche markets and professional services; Entrepreneurial
emphasis, programs grew directly form departments
Specially appointed faculty to work on DL programs
DL restricted to PG MA courses (students already accomplished learners,
possess sufficient capability for independent study)
Prevailing model involves printed materials, video and audio with some
on-line material and F2F tuition; MA in mass communication includes
occasional weekend conferences in UK, Hong Kong, Singapore, Taiwan,
Thailand,
US models
US experience – higher adoption, sharper technological edge, but missing the
‘large course team dynamic’ of OU





By 1999, TeleEducation database included 9000 courses that can be taken
completely on-line.
In Texas 98 out of 116 HE institutions using DL education
180 accredited graduate schools and more than 150 colleges support DL
degree programs;
More than half universities and colleges offer at least some parts of their
UG programs on-line.
More than half of HE use or have formal plans to use Internet in DL ;
24







Many of on-line courses designed for on-campus students.
On-line players include Stanford, (MSc in EE in 1998), Harvard Business
School. Work on web-based training for corporations.
IDC : US market for web-based training to grow from 197M$ in 1997 to
6B$ in 2000+
Few institutions entirely dedicated to online education: National
Technological University (WBL delivery) Western Governors University,
California Virtual University (launched in 1998) Both use ‘clearing house’
model i.e offer DL programs from member colleges and universities.
Internet-only institutions include Jones International University and
several non-accredited institutions.
University of California on-line extension program (began in 1996)
University of Phoenix offers CB teaching flexibly taught in many different
learning centers (50000 students in 1998), also offering 10% of courses
via on-line model; caters for working adults. Accelerated courses (5w for
UG and 6w for PG)
Other models:






Vancouver Open Learning Agency
Norway’s NKS and NKI Distance Education organizations
Florida Nova Universities
University of South Africa
African Virtual University (virtual network of 53 institutions in 27 African
states, more than 3000 registered students) – connectivity problem for
Web material, radio-based
Pre HE examples: Florida Virtual School (2006)
25
Framework for classification of DL models
(see accompanying PPT slides)
Technology axis:
 Range of media (audio, video, animation)
 Interactive tools (quizzes, games)
 Degree of personalization
 Sophisticated back-end (tracking progress, logs, annotations)
 Web-page design incl. navigation, interactivity
 Web2 tools (wikis, blogs, RSS, sharing of slides, images etc)
 Communication environment to facilitate dialogue
Pedagogy axis:
Didactic/Constructivist
 Emphasis: on content/ on students interaction
 Assessment focus: test retention of content /process and student
interpretation
 Assessment emphasis: on correct answers/on students own experiences
and understanding of concepts
 Traditional lecture based instructions/
 Textual explanations/use of technologies & collaborative learning
techniques
 Teacher centric (expert knowledge)/teacher as a facilitator and mentor
 Behaviorist list approach to learning; explain & test/Learning as a social
activity
Cost:


Production cost - Producing a range of materials and media
Presentation cost – educators involvement (staff time and cost)
Categorization and associated cost(production/presentation)



Technology rich-constructivists (high/medium)
o Virtual environments, different online spaces that promote
collaboration
o Desired goal; particularly c useful for design engineering and
scientific subjects
Technology low-constructivists(low/high)
o Simple web site with a lot of CMC
o Small scale university courses in non-tech subjects that involve a
lot of debate e.g. online courses in theology, philosophy, history etc
Technology rich-didactic(high/low)
o Web-based training, often aimed at individuals, may or may not be
supported by tutor
26
o Markets include: CPD, professional certifications, accreditations,
lifelong learning, WBL

Technology low-didactic(low/low)
o Based around streaming video lectures, some form of CMC e.g. email;
very little investment (might benefit organization)
o Early attempts
DL design criteria, considerations, issues and barriers for
adoption
Design criteria
- Audience
- Course Objectives
- Presentation and production cost
- Available resources (staff, technology)
- Scale (50 students – small, 1000 students- large)
Design considerations:
- Systematic design, development, evaluation and revision
- Interactivity (increases the retention rate from 20 to 75%)
- Active learning (sense of ownership of the learning goals)
- Visual imagery (caution against ‘edutainment’)
- Effective communication
- Learning preferences of students (cooperative, competitive or
individualized)
- Level of teachers’ mediation
- Learner’s support (site visits, office hours, telephone calls. Mini f2f
conferences)
- Availability of site facilitators (tutorials, support and assessment)
- Team effort (teacher, students, administrators, learning technologies, site
administrator, local tutors etc)
- Learners differences (cultural diversity, learning preferences, ability
level)
- Move from pull to push information
- Learners demand more control over the learning experience
- Focus of design from standardization to customization of content
- DL curses should not be modelled after traditional lectures but should
instead be based on interaction as the foundation of effective DL practice
- Multi-theory approach required
- Pacing techniques
Suitability:

Self-motivated individuals
27

Independent learners
Issues














Learners’ identity
Social presence (sense of belonging) - the degree to which individual
perceive immediacy, intimacy and their particular role in a relationship
(interaction is possible w/out soc presence)
Authentication
Quality material (visual imagery in particular;beware of: ‘edutainment’))
Effectiveness of remote communication
Media-based challenges, Technical skills of the audience, Accessibility and
usability
New skills for teachers (understanding the philosophy of DL, identifying
needs of DL, designing and developing interactive courseware, adapting
teaching strategies for distance delivery, organizing resources to format
suitable for independent learners, training and practices in use of
technology)
Communication through digital media
Management and policy issues (impact of DL on CB teaching, new forms
of assessment, DL competencies and accreditations, technology retaining
and availability for all
copyright issues
monitoring issues (language, abuse etc)
role of tutors (facilitator, resource manager, partner in learning, maximize
students interactions, actively participating in the exchange of knowledge
and reflection – leading to reciprocal learning process)
balance between learners’ needs and affordability
student/staff ratio
Barriers for adoption /students:






Students likely to have insecurities about learning (work/school balance,
lack of support from employers, financial cost ) etc leading to higher
drop-out rate
Lack of feedback and contact with the teacher
Lack of student support services (library, technical assistance, tutors etc)
Feeling of isolation and alienation
No previous experience in DL
Lack of induction/student training
Barriers for adoption /staff:
 Lack of staff training
 Lack of support for DL programs
 Lack of support from faculty (work load model)
 Different role for teachers
 Lack of f2f contact
28
Future formations for quality DL
While the last 40 years of L&T practice and innovation have been focused on
PBL, collaborative and technology supported learning, and the last 5 years
concentrated almost solely on WEB2 collaborative aspects of learning, the future
learning applications are going to be net-centric, cloud applications
Table 1 Taxonomy of many (Anderson, 2009)
Metaphor
Attributes
Tools
Group
virtual
classroom,
VLE
discussion forums,
wikis, wiggio
Network
virtual
community of
practice
(Wengler),
Web 2.0
Collectives
emerging netcentric
applications
structure,
pacing,
leadership,
sense of privacy,
time-limited,
blended
fluid
membership,
emergent
norms, activity
ebbs and flows,
rarely f2f, little
expectation of
reciprocity,
transparency
leaving traces
on the net,
aggregate the
information and
extract
knowledge,
wisdom of the
crowd idea
Participatory
motivation
recognition,
relevance,
socializing
google wave, digg,
facebook,
wePapers,
courseHero, elgg,
ning,
voicethread.com
altruism, raising
own reputation
and social
capital
Slashdot, Omgili
altruism, raising
own reputation
and social
capital
References
Anderson T (2009) ALT-C 2009 - Keynote Speech on 10 September 2009
Beldarrain Y. (2006) Distance education trends : Integrating new technologies to
foster student interaction and collaboration, Distance Education 27(2) 139-153
29
Boyed-Barrett O (1999) European and North American Models of Distance
Education, The Cal Poly Pomona Journal Of Interdisciplinary Studies
Galusha J. (1997) Barriers to learning in distance education; Interpersonal
Computing and Technology, 1997
Gaspay A., Dardan S., Legorreta L. (2008) Distance learning through the lens of
learning models ; Review of Business Research, Vol 8 Number 4
Haddleton F (2009) UH DL models (table)
Sherry L (1996) Issues in Distance Learning, International Journal of Educational
Telecommunications, 1(4) 337-365
Weller M. (2002) Delivering Learning on the Net ; Routledge_Farmer
30