The Future of Distance Learning

As my course on distance learning draws to a close, I am energized and excited about the potential for the use of distance learning in business, higher education, and K-12 education. In the next five to ten years I expect the availability and use of distance learning models, especially online and blended models, will increase significantly in all these sectors. This growth will be accompanied with increased acceptance of online and blended courses and degrees as viable options to the traditional face-to-face. Within the next ten to twenty years, I believe that all courses with include some level of integration of distance learning technologies, and I expect the identification of a course as a face-to-face, web-assisted, blended, or online will no longer exist. A course will just be a course, and it will include a mix of delivery features, likely student specific, that addresses the learning needs.

Dr. Frank Mayadas, retired Program Director of the Sloan Foundation foresees face-to-face and online learning merging into a common tool that will address distance learners, near distance learners close enough to attend face-to-face once every week or two weeks, and students that are on campus (2010). He believes that "online and computer tools will penetrate every class" resulting in blended classes with varying combinations of distance and face-to-face learning. Joeann Humbert of the Rochester Institute of Technology notes that their courses are not designated as being campus-based or online. Students, whether distance or on campus, take a course, and decide if they prefer to take that course online, in a classroom on campus, or a blend of the two.

I believe that K-12 education needs to adopt a similar course of action that combines online or computer-based instruction with face-to-face instruction and support. I agree with Bingham, Davis, and Moore when they suggest that shrinking budgets and expanding curriculum may force K-12 educational organizations to implement distance learning. They point out that distance learning may address issues of inequity resulting from limited resources in rural school districts and provide opportunities for collaboration outside of their physical location. It is in the arena of K-12 opportunity that I want to apply the technology tools and distance learning opportunities to support high-quality, 21st-century instruction for all students.

As an instructional designer, I have the opportunity to demonstrate the power of distance learning courses. By creating interactive and engaging activities in online or blended lessons, I have an opportunity to connect with non-learners, and provide access to resources, tools, and information not accessible to students. I can help teachers collaboratively build instructional modules that can help them provide differentiated, personalized learning for their students. I can help them develop assessments and provide resources to assess and address student understanding. As students, parents, teachers, and administrators see the opportunities, interactivity, engagement and learning that distance learning courses can provide, their perception of the usefulness of that distance learning may change. However, this requires time, access to subject manager experts, and creation or revision of content. Simply dumping presentations, worksheets, and paper-based assessments into a distance learning tool will not result in the many potential benefits available from infusing technology and enabling self-managed learning.

To be a positive force for continuous improvement in the field of distance education requires me to continually add and apply knowledge from other colleagues in the field. It also requires me to constantly review and assess my own work to identify what works and what does not work, and then share that information with colleagues. Finally, I must remain aware of and committed to the students who are my ultimate customers.

References

Bingham, J., Davis, T., & Moore, C. (2006). Emerging Technologies in Distance Learning.  Horizon Site: Issues Challenging Education.  Retrieved from http://horizon.unc.edu/projects/issues/papers/Distance_Learning.asp

NUTNNetwork [YouTube Video].(2011, April 7).Digital Learning 2010 Virtual Conference: Future of Distance Learning. [With F. Mayadas, J. Humbert, K. Scalzo, and J. Ebersole]. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIfrlF7LPoY

Week 7

Migrating a Face-to-Face Course to a Blended Learning Course: Best Practices

For variety of reasons, many businesses and schools are opting to offer online or blended distance learning in addition to or instead of traditional face-to-face learning environments. For trainers and teachers, it is important to understand differences in planning face-to-face instruction and planning for distance learning. This post will provide a guide to some of the most important considerations when revising a face-to-face course for use as a blended learning course.

Rovai and Hope (2004) identify three key considerations that should be addressed when revising a face-to-face course for distance learning. First, many face-to-face courses are teacher-centered. A preferred model is student-centered.  In a student-centered model, the instructor becomes more of a facilitator of student learning by supporting students in developing self-direction in their learning and helping students become critical thinkers. Second, instructors and facilitators must reach out to students to prevent a sense of isolation and help students adjust to a self-directed learning environment.  This requires the student to become an active learner rather that a passive learner.  Third, building a sense of community among learners provides additional support and a sense of belonging that is critical to student success in a distance learning situation.  The course designer and facilitator must provide tools and opportunities that allow students to interact with other students.

Based on these three considerations, here are some tips for successfully reconfiguring a face-to-face course to create an effective blended-model distance learning course:

Creating a student-centered environment

• Understand the technology used to deliver the course and be able to support students in using that technology (Piskurich & Chauser, n.d.).
• Provide a lesson plan that includes a variety of activities to provide students with engaging and interactive opportunities for learning in which the student discover and construct knowledge.
• Specify expected learning results (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, and Zvacek, 2009).
• Provide a detailed syllabus to provide student with general course expectations, specific assignment requirements, schedule, deadlines (Durrington, Berryhill, & Swafford, 2004).
• Avoid "Death by PowerPoint". Use polling, small group discussion, short formative assessments, and other activities to keep students engaged and attentive.

Helping students be successful in a distance learning environment

• Provide opportunities for students to practice using technological resources prior to when they have to use such technologies for graded assignments (Simonson et. al., 2009). Allowing students to experiment with access to courses and modules, posting and responding to discussion prompts, responding to polling or assessment tools, and submitting assignments to drop boxes will prevent panic and frustration when these tools are used in the actual class.
• Be in constant contact with students to support their efforts to become self-managed, self-motivated learners.
• Provide a discussion area where students can post questions and receive answers from the facilitator. It is important that the instructor respond to such questions in a timely manner, and students should be provided with reasonable expectations of when they can expect a response (e.g. 24 or 48 hours) (Durrington, Berryhill, & Swafford, 2004).
• Foster collaboration, cooperation, and supportive culture. Help students understand the value of collaboration in the learning process.
• Provide opportunities for students to share information about themselves to build connections between students and the facilitator (Simonson et. al., 2009).
• Encourage students to seek help from colleagues, not just from the facilitator.

Encouraging and supporting student interaction

• Establish protocols and expectations related to student interactions, such as demonstrating respect for others' opinions, responding to others using positive, non-threatening language, and being courtesy to fellow students. If needed, address individual issues.
• Consider breaking the class in to small groups for focused interaction and then share out the results to the larger group.
• Document minimum requirements for written student interaction based on length of posting (e.g. 3-5 paragraphs, 600-750 words, etc.) and the number and or frequency of postings (e.g. a minimum of 5 postings each week made on at least two separate days).
• Use a rubric to help students understand expectations.
• Grade discussions for participation and quality.
• As an instructor, monitor discussion to help students stay on topic and ask open-ended questions to help students think more deeply and subtly provide direction students to consider key.
• Refrain from answering all postings; a rule of thumb is to respond to no more than every fourth posting (Simonson et. al., 2009).
• Allow students to develop discussions with minimal intervention unless the discussion goes far off topic or to help redirect discussion to foster additional interaction and learning.

References

Durrington, V., Berryhill, A., & Swafford, J. (2006). Strategies for enhancing student interactivity in an online environment. College Teaching, 54(1), 190–193. Retrieved from http://www.redorbit.com/news/technology/433631/strategies_for_enhancing_student_interactivity_in_an_online_environment/

Piskurich, G. & Chauser,J. (n.d.). Facilitating Online Learning [Video].  Retrieved from http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=5693699&Survey=1&47=5871191&ClientNodeID=984650&coursenav=1&bhcp=1.

Rovai, A. & Jordan, H. (2004 August).  Blended learning and sense of community: A comparative analysis with traditional and fully online graduate courses. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 5(2), ISSN: 1492-3831.  Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/viewArticle/192.

Simonson, M., Smaldino, S., Albright, M., & Zvacek, S. (2009). Teaching and learning at a distance: Foundations of distance education (4th ed.) Boston, MA: Pearson.

Week 5

Analyzing an Open Course

Occasionally, it is amazing to reflect on the changes in our world. This week, I am reviewing open courses that include offerings from top-notch colleges. I have a child in a highly respected engineering/computer science program in a southeastern college close to home. I find it incredible that this same child, with just a little bit of motivation, can supplement his current courses with courses from MIT or Stanford University. When I attended college, some 20+ years ago, I would have never dreamed I could have taken courses from top-rated schools from across the country and across the globe for free!

This week, I reviewed open courses offered by Stanford University. Through a program called Stanford Engineering Everywhere, selected engineering and programming courses are made available free of charge. This program includes nine popular courses related to computer programming and engineering. I specifically reviewed the course on iPad Application Development. You can access information on the Stanford Engineering Everywhere Program at http://see.stanford.edu/default.aspx. To directly access the iPad Application Development, go to http://itunes.apple.com/itunes-u/iphone-application-development/id384233225.

While the Stanford Engineering Everywhere provides some incredible content, it is clear that the course was not preplanned nor designed specifically for an online distance learning environment. Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, and Zvacek (2009) identify several fundamentals of teaching online. The first of these is to avoid simply transferring a face-to-face course on to the web. It appears that this is exactly what was done to create the iPad Application Development course. The content of the course consists of a series of videotaped lectures, each of which is a video of the live lecture for a face-to-face class. The video includes lesson content and announcements that were intended for live students in the course. Along with the recorded lectures, students can download the presentation slides used in each lecture. Also available are recordings of optional seminars offered each Friday for the face-to-face class.

A link to the course page is also provided in the course materials in iTunes. This course page (http://www.stanford.edu/class/cs193p/cgi-bin/drupal/) offers a syllabus, information on how to submit assignments, frequently asked questions, a link for submitting questions, and access to a group blog. All of these tools are also focused on students who are taking the live, face-to-face course. One offering that is useful for students accessing the Open Course version of this class is files containing assignments and lecture notes from each class meeting.

Clearly, the content and design are not designed and implemented for use as a blended or on-line course. At best, the course might be considered a web-assisted course for its original target students enrolled at Stanford, based on the use of the Internet to access course sessions on iTunes, to receive and submit assignments, and to collaborate with classmates and instructors. Even at that, based on my review the lecture format did not provide activities that promoted active learning for students. Only in the optional interactive sessions on Fridays approached active learning opportunities. That said, it is important to understand that the Stanford Engineering Everywhere program is not claiming that these Open Courses are true online courses. In the Frequently Asked Questions section, the university clearly states that any student not enrolled in Stanford University and taking this course will not receive credit nor have access to course instructors for help. While students have access to assignments in the course, these assignments are not turned in or graded. Tools for instructor support and student collaboration are also limited to use by active Stanford students.

So, in summary, this course does not provide the features that should be in a course intended for online learning. In contrast, it is designed as a face-to-face class that uses technology to improve information exchange and to support the students. Despite that, a large number of the unenrolled students accessing this site have provided very positive feedback on this course. Does that mean we shouldn't worry about appropriately designing online courses and ensuring that instructors follow good fundamentals for teaching these online courses. Absolutely not! What is means to me is that there is a tremendous need and desire for information-rich online courses similar to those offered by open courses. I applaud Stanford and other universities for making this kind of quality content available for both student use and for the use by instructors anywhere.

References

Stanford Engineering Everywhere (n.d.), Retrieved from http://see.stanford.edu/default.aspx.

Simonson, M., Smaldino, S., Albright, M., & Zvacek, S. (2009). Teaching and learning at a distance: Foundations of distance education (4th ed.) Boston, MA: Pearson.

Week 3

Taking an Interactive Tour

Free images from http://acobox.com

Interactive tours are a great way to increase student interest and engagement.  Such tours enable students to take a "virtual field trip" to locations far and near.  This week's blog posting will provide insight into tools that can enable such field trips.

As an example, a high school teacher of American History wants to tour art museum exhibitions related to historic time periods being studied.  Her class is located on the west coast of the United States, but she want to view exhibits at two New York City museums.  The tour will include an interactive discussion with the museum curator on the features and styles of the art exhibits.  The students will then critique two works of art from each exhibition, as selected by the teacher.

A variety of tools can be used to accomplish this type of interactive tour.  The first option is to see if a virtual tour of  the exhibit of interest has already been made available on the internet.  Museums,  like most other businesses and entities, have a presence on the web.  On their websites, the teacher can locate a variety of current and previous exhibitions.  These virtual exhibits may provide pictures, textual  information, narrated videos, and interactive media.   Some American History exhibitions currently available include the Metropolitan Museum of Art's American Wing that offers exhibits of furniture, architecture, ceramics, glass, pewter, silver, and jewelry, as well as an exhibition of Native North America Art  that provides picture, text, and video of specific exhibits.  Additional videos are offered on the Metropolitan Museum of Art's You Tube channel.    Other sources offering  virtual multimedia tours of exhibitions from a variety of museums include the PBS arts website and the Google Art Project.  The tools required for this type of  interactive tour are simply a computer with internet access attached to a large screen TV or a digital projector and screen.  Alternatively, if students have individual computers with audio earphones or earbuds, each student can take an individualized tour.  The virtual tour could then be accompanied or followed by an interactive session with museum staff to discuss exhibits and address student questions.

Alternatively, if the teacher has a contact with the museum curator, the museum staff may be willing to create a custom tour.  Capabilities provided by digital cameras, digital audio-video recorders  make it easy for novices to record images and sound files that can easily be loaded on to a computer.  Museum staff can share images and video by posting them on the web using wikis, uploading videos to YouTube , presenting them using web conferencing tools, or even through streaming video/webcast if the school and the museum have these capabilities.  If the museum curator is willing, a particularly effective, relatively simple option for engaging the students would be to set up a web conference that would allow the students to view pictures and videos of the exhibits while being able to converse with the museum staff.  A number of tools are available to web conference, including GoToMeeting, Webex, and Adobe Connect.  Web conferencing tools allow the museum staff to present pictures and videos from their computer  to the teacher's computer or students computer(s).  The teacher can connect her computer to a large screen TV or digital projector to display images to the entire class.  Speakers and a microphone attached to the class computer(s) and the museum  computer enable two-way conversation.  The session can even be recorded for viewing later.

Following the exhibition presentation, the teacher wants to divide her students into small groups to critique selected exhibits.  A variety of tools can provide an interesting, 21st-century collaborative experience.  Blogs or wikis are excellent tools for enabling students to report and reflect on information.  For this situation, since the teacher wants the students to report and reflect in small groups, wikis such as wikispaces would work well.  Another option is to have students video their critique using an inexpensive, easy-to-use video recorder such as the FlipVideo.  This provides a welcome variation to the standard written summary.

References

Adobe Connect (2010).  Retrieved from http://connect.brand.us.sem.adobe.com/content/try?sdid=IEAST&skwcid=TC|22191|adobe%20connect||S|p|5894708062.

Art Project: Powered by Google (2008).  Retrieved from http://www.googleartproject.com/.

Cisco Webex (2011).  Retrieved from http://www.webex.com/.

FlipVideo (2011).  Retrieved from http://www.theflip.com/en-us/.

GoToMeeting (2011).  Retrieved from http://www.gotomeeting.com/.

Metropolitan Museum of Art: The New American Wing (2011).  Retrieved from http://www.metmuseum.org/works_of_art/american_decorative_arts/american_wing_2009.

Metropolitan Museum of Art; Special Exhibitions (2011).  Retrieved from http://www.metmuseum.org/special/se_event.asp?OccurrenceId=%7b67815B03-6866-46AD-ACEF-C637B4C52B1F%7d.

PBS Arts (2010),  Retrieved from http://www.pbs.org/arts/.

Simonson, M., Smaldino, S., Albright, M., & Zvacek, S. (2009). Teaching and learning at a distance: Foundations of distance education (4th ed.) Boston, MA: Pearson.

Wikispaces (2011). Retrieved from http://www.wikispaces.com/.

YouTube: Metropolitan Museum of Art (N.D.).  Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/user/metmuseum#g.

Distance Learning MindMap

Distance Learning Defined on Prezi

Week 1 Post

Distance Learning Defined

When asked to give my definition of distance learning, I thought, "How hard can that be?"  Distance learning is what I'm doing now. It's online learning, right?  Distance learning is computer-based instruction. The teacher is in one place, and the student is in a different place. It can be synchronous, such as the instructor providing an online lesson in real time, or it could be asynchronous, in which case I could look at that online lesson anytime I want.  Assignments are completed and submitted using drop boxes, postings to blogs, wikis, or conversation boards.  Students work independently or collaborate, but everything is done using technology.

What I learned from our week one resources was that I had a very narrow concept of distance learning. I've taken lots of distance learning classes without even realizing.  Remember all those advertisements asking, "Do you want to be an artist?" or how about the one that asked, "Do you want to write for children?"  Well, I took that course on writing for children, and it was a distance learning course.  The only technology use the use of a computer to type my assignments, but those assignments were submitted and returned on paper using what we now call snail mail.  Yes, I mailed my stories to my professor via the U.S. Postal system, and after several weeks I received a marked-up copy from my instructor.  Other examples of distance learning from my past includes satellite lectures in an MBA program, educational television programs, and WebEx trainings provided by our State Department of Education.  I also took several computer-based training on Microsoft Office and .Net programming that I did consider to be distance learning courses.  I found that these were actually not considered distance learning courses based on the definitions provided in this week's resources.

So, how do you define what is and isn't distance learning?  Well, one commonly accepted definition according to Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek (2009) requires four components:

1. The course or program is provided by an institution, such as a college, school, or company.
2. A separation of teacher and student exists, based on geography, time, and/or intellectually.
3. Interactive telecommunication occurs between the student and the teacher, either synchronously or asynchronously.
4. Connections exist between the teacher, student(s), and resources by sharing data, audio, or video, resulting in learning experiences.

However, there exists a number of other definitions of distance learning. The United States Department of Education defines distance learning as the application of telecommunications and electronic devices to enable instruction across distance locations (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek (2009).  That sounds a lot like my initial definition of distance learning, and I submit that that definition is too narrow.  Other definitions include Rumble's description that requires physical separation of student and teacher and two-way communication, and Keegan's definition that requires five elements including:

1. Separation of teacher and student.
2. Planning and preparation of learning materials by an educational organization.
3. Use of technical media.
4. Use of two-way communication.
5. Application of a primarily individual learning process.

More recent definitions include concepts such as open learning and virtual learning, which focus on the individualization and computer delivery of e-learning.

So in my revised personal definition of distance learning, I would propose that distance education requires the following features:

1. Separation of student and teacher during most or all of the instructional time.
2. Involvement of an instructional entity that plans, manages, and supports the instruction.
3. Two-way communication between the teacher and the student.
4. Interactivity using media such as print, audio, video or other computer-based tools.

This definition covers everything from correspondents courses to online learning management systems.  I believe that distance learning can be achieved in many ways, and therefore my definition is much broader than it was before.

In the future, I can envision the definition of distance learning becoming even broader as e-learning options grow. Consider the changes that have been made in just the last 10 years in electronic communication, delivery of information, accessibility of pre-recorded learning in both audio and video formats, and collaborative technologies that allow access to other individuals near and far.  I envision continued tremendous growth in the availability of tools and materials that support computer-based distance learning.  However, e-learning is no magic fix for educational needs in business, in higher learning, and certainly not in K-12 education.  What I do see as very promising is the integration of increasingly available distance learning with face-to-face instruction to provide a richer education for all students.  I agree with Huett, Moller, Foshay, and Coleman (2008) when they predict:
...our view for the future is actually quite positive: We just need to choose to view e-learning as the question rather than the answer.  In short, the Internet and e-learning make wonderful things possible if we decide, as educators and trainers, to exploit those possibilities intelligently and systematically.

References

Huett, J., Moller, L., Foshay, W., & Coleman, C. (2008). The evolution of distance education: Implications for instructional design on the potential of the web (Part 3: K12). TechTrends, 52(5), 63–67. Retrieved from the Academic Search Complete.

Simonson, M., Smaldino, S., Albright, M., & Zvacek, S. (2009). Teaching and learning at a distance: Foundations of distance education (4th ed.) Boston, MA: Pearson.

Welcome colleagues!

I look forward to learning with you in this course!