; DISTANCE EDUCATION A Systems View Michael G. Moore Penn State University Greg Kearsley George Washington University ‘Wadsworth Publishing Company I@P° An tnternatonal Thomson Publishing Company 1946CHAPTER 1 Fundamentals of Distance Education ae first chapter we introduce some basic ideas about distance education, and in particular the idea of a systems approach to the study and practice ofthis field. A distance educa: tion system should include the components of content, designs ‘communications, interaction, learner environment, and manage- nent, We suggest that the systems model helps us understand distance education; it helps us analyze and evaluate what is Sometimes called distance education but may not be; it provides ‘a model for good practice at all levels. ‘the fundamental concept of distance education i simple enough: Studen's 20 The aay separated by aistance and sometimes by time. This contrasts wih teacher cat tutorial in which a teacher and an individual learner met at "he the arfime and place (as they stil do at the Universities of Oxford and Cam fridge), and the more familiar contemporary rnodel of instruction iA 8 class- rege amene a teacher talks to a group of learner, all together atthe same tine in the same place. “faencher and students are not together in the same place or together at the same time, they are separated by distance, and as a result it becortes nee ee.y to intreduce an artifical communications medium that wil! deliver In: Fenamotion and also provide a channel for interaction between ther cation ce of printed and electronic technologies asthe primary form of com rnunitation ie the frst and most obvious characteristic that éistinguishes dis: aaans adueation from other forms of education. Using such technologies oPeoe tip range of exciting new ways in which instructors can present information ae ant their interactions with the learner. The successful use of comin: ane con echnologies, however, requires special design techniques and moreDistance education aims to provide {instruetion in places and times that are convenient for learners rather than teachers or teaching institutions. responsibilities include traditional classroom instruction, In recent years many Faculty have chosen to teach their courses off-campus by means of audio or videoconferencing, simply adding the distant learners to. their conventional ‘dass, This is sometimes referred to as the “craft” approach to distance educa~ tion, since it usvally consists of a single teacher working alone, as contrasted to working with a team in a systems approach. A distance learning program does not usually have its own faculty or administrative services. ‘2, Distance Learning Unit A special and separate unit within a conventional college, university, or school system that is dedicated to distance learning ac- tivities, Such a unit will normally have administrative staff whose sole respon: sibilities are distance education; it may also have dedicated faculty, though ‘most call on the faculty of the parent body to provide most of the teaching for the unit, The extension divisions of most universities are illustrative of this level of distance education. 3. Distance Learning Institution ‘The sole purpose of the institution is dis- tance education. All activities are exclusively devoted to distance education. Such an institution will have a faculty and administrative staff whose duties are different from those at a traditional college, university, school system, or train {ng department. The British Open University (Chapter 2) is a world-famous example of a distance learning institution,4 cuapren 1 Fundamentals of Distance Education 4, Distance Learning Consortia Consostia normally consist of two or more distance learning institutions or units who share in either the design or deliv- ery of programs, or both. The National University Teleconference Network (NUTN) and “Star Schools” are examples of such consortia. " ‘this distinction among the different levels of distance learning providers will be used throughout the rst of the book, It will be useful to you as you read about distance education to try to identify whether what is being talked about is at program, unit, institutional or consortium level, since the term is used care- lessly—though not, we hope, in this book! Since it would have been tedious to refer continuously to programs, units, Institutions, and consortia, we have often used the term “distance education or. ganization” to cover them al. Courses and Programs In the literature, and also in this book, you will ind reference to “courses”, and also you will find the term “programs” used with a different meaning from “dis- tance learning program” as explained above. “Courses” are produced at all levels of distance education. In a distance ed- ucation program as defined above, the course is based on the practices and standards of the parent institution, In a conventional American university, a graduate course is likely to be around 150 hours of study with about 45 to 50 hours of direct contact between instriicior and students, Therefore the distance education course, usually taught by teleconferencing, will be of the same dura- tion. At the British Open University—a distance education institution—a course is around 450 hours of study with little or no direct instructor-learner face-to- face contact. In all cases a course will a least have learning objectives, one or ‘more teachers, a medium of communication, and content, or subject matter. ‘The word “program” is often used in a number of senses besides those de- fined above. Sometimes “program” will refer to audio or television programs that make up part of a course. Sometimes an institution, unit, consortium, or program will refer to its “program” as a generic label to indicate its total offer- ing of courses. ‘Throughout this book we have tried to be as specific as possible in using these terms; the meaning will usually be clear from the context. We hope that brief discussion will at least alert you to exercise caution as you encounter these words and to pause to ask yourself what different authors mean when ‘they use them. A Systems Approach ‘We believe that a systems approach is very helpful to an understanding of istance education as a field of study and is essential to its successful practice. ‘Throughout this book we often refer to distance education systems, and even‘A systems Approach, ‘pis clase meets wit their instructor and with groups in Mexico Finland, and sane cae ell asthe United States, using audio, video, and computes ‘conference technology. ‘wen we do not use the term, our thinking is influenced by 2 systems perspective pective. _ edueatin system consists ofall the component processes at ee de- Tran, and managemeat, and even such less obvious cor»Ponetia history and 2 a rr piutosophy. Within each of these broadly named componet Ve sarems, bi ave eyes i Themselves, For eXAUD\e, 1595 & © subsys- aa earvry distance education system that deals with course esigh Oe that ten cerca component activities working together so that a soutse Ne includes amy ay, om time and at acceptable cst. The course decgn wha sae ithe ciher subsystems to form the total system, Wis Wt St tem oe study each ofthese subsystems separately, we must 290 091.0 Ne aoe nteneltionships. Anything that happens in one Bar of We ee tapas oan we need to old inthe back of our minds « piers of the total context I ystems model provides a tool that not only helps us reopgnice ett orth vtecday that separate distance education from conventional educations but oa epatay distinguish good distance education fom bad. Hisiieaty. also nee ng iteel{ nor the organization of education has been very systemsCHAPTER 1 Fundamentals of Distance Education Distance education courses have been developed and delivered in a very piece- ‘meal and unplanned fashion. With a systems perspective we can see why this had unfortunate and unsatisfactory outcomes in terms of students’ learning or cost-effectiveness, or both. In future we think it wili be better for students, teachers, and educational institutions if every distance education course was designed and developed in a systematic way and if every distance education or- ganization is developed, as other modern agencies are, as a total system, Systems in Practice ‘While a systems view is a good conceptual tool that helps us understand and analyze distance education, iis also a tool that must be applied inthe practice of distance education at any level. Following a systems strategy, each component process in a distance educa- tion institution, unit, program, or consortium may be developed and operated independently to some degree, but good quality requires that the development and operation of each component be controlled in such a way that it is fully in- tegrated with the development and operation of all other components, making each supportive of the others. ‘This systematic approach can and should be applied in the development and delivery of every course. When a distance education course is developed in fa system, there is a control mechanism that ensures that all the component processes are well integrated and interact with each other. Then the duality of the final product—that is, the course—is greater than could be achieved by any of the component contributors acting alone. ‘When a systems approach is applied at the level of an organization, a state, or a nation, the majority of the distance education resources of that organiza tion, state, or nation are integrated. In such a system, every course is planned to take into account how it impacts on every other course, every piece of every course is carefully designed to fit with every other piece, every technology is, employed in harmony with every other, what an instructor discusses with stu- denis fits with the illustrations included in a study guide, the learner support personnel have access to specialists within the providing organization to deal with the issues arising at each step of a course, and so on. ‘The Need for a Systems View ‘A common misperception among educators who are not familiar with a systems approach is. that it is possible to benefit from introducing technology into edu- cation without doing anything to change the other ways in which education is currently organized. They think that by moving cameras, computers, and microphones into the classrooms, schools, universities, and training depart- ments, they can increase enrollments, provide new curricula, and save money ‘without doing anything else. According to this view, once the technology is in place, there is little else to be done except to let teachers get on with practicing‘A Systems Approach 7 their craft as they have always done. They decide what to teach, prepare the lessons, and interact with students via the camera, computer, telephone, or some combinations of these. Alas, this is a very immature view of distance education, and it won’t work. It is not possible to improve quality, provide for more students, and lower costs ‘without reorganizing education according to a systems model. An analogy of the situation we face can be found in the airline industry, In the early days of commercial aviation, passengers were met by the pilot and an assistant on the runway, paid for their tickets, walked with their bags to the airplane, and were then flown to their destination. The organization af the process af passenger ‘transportation was equally primitive to the airplane, Today, airline organization depends on a systems model in which there i specialization of labor—there are many hundreds of different specialized jobs— and a sophisticated, computer-supported workflow that ensures everyone's ‘work fits with everyone else's. No single individual, not even the pilot, is able to move the passenger without the contribution of hundreds of other workers, including technicians, communications specialists, and administrators of all kinds, The result of this organizational feat is the provision of high-quality ser- vice at a lower passenger cost,to millions of travelers than could have been imagined at the beginnings of airline service. ‘When we compare the airline with a school, university, or training depart- ment, we arrive at the heart of the misconception about distance education. As with the airline, a distance education system only becomes cost-effective when it can take advantage of economies of scale. This means that the larger the number of users of the system, the lower the cost for each person. This concept, 0 faniiliar in other walks of life, comes about as a result of another common practice that the systems approach makes possible—the “division of labor.” In distance education, especially bearing in mind the different technologies that are available, you cannot just “go it alone” and maintain high quality and low costs. Strangely, education is one of the few areas of modern life where di- vision of labor, or specialization, is still not practiced to any great extent. In tra- ditional classrooms, individual teachers develop and deliver their own courses. ‘They try to be effective communicators, curriculum designers, evaluators, mo- tivators, group discussion facilitators, as well as content experts. This is an ex- tremely wasteful use of human resources, when the content and objectives of s0 many courses are identical, and it produces wide variation in quality of education. Simply adding a new technology to this “craft” approach to teaching will not give good distance education, and because the capital costs of the equip- ment needed are so high and the resources and time required to develop good courses are considerable, it is not financially viable either. Instead, courses need io be developed by teams of specialists and taken by many students across a large number of educational institutions, Just as it is not simply the skill of a pilot even when added to new technology that makes an airline work, so nei- ther the teacher alone nor the technology will make distance education work, though of course these are both critical components of any system.8 CHAPTER 1 Fundamentals of Distance Faucation ‘The biggest challenges facing education today are for legislatures to de- velop policies that require the development of a total systems approach for dis- tance education, for administrators to redistribute human and capital resources into a total system, and for teachers to be trained to work as specialists within such a system, Components of a Distance Education System Figure 1.1 presents a general systems model that describes the main component processes and elements of a distance education institution, program, unit, con- sortium, or course, These are the common components that will be found at all levels and types of distance education, There must be sources of knowledge or skills that will be taught and learned as well as a process for finding out what students need to learn and for deciding what particular content will be taught. ‘There must be one subsystem that arranges the design of courses and another ‘that provides the communications services to teachers, learners, and adminis- trators. Instructors and others interact with students to help the learning process. There must of course be learners in their different learning environ- ments. Finally, at the most general level, there must be an organization with a policy and a management structure that controls and administers the various parts of each of these subsystems. We will now examine each part of this system briefly, and we will later focus on each of these components in turn, Content Experts aiid Other Sources of Knowledge ‘The responsibility for deciding what knowledge will be taught by an organiza- tion (whether it be a university, college, school, or training department of a cor- poration, government, or voluntary agency) is that of the organization and its faculty—the people who know their field, its literature, theory, contemporary practice, and problems. Decisions will be made in the light of the organization's educational mission and philosophy, reflected by the philosophy of its teachers, ‘and this in turn will be determined by the organization's history and the his- tory of education in the country in which the organization is located. For most distance education organizations it is also important to know what knowledge students themselves feel they need, and to develop courses that take into account what they want to lear. Students may also be regarded as potential sources and creators of knowledge, and courses may be designed to employ project and other self-directed learning activities. The degree to which a distance education organization or course might draw on students as a source of knowledge will be influenced by the educational philosophies of the organization and its faculty, There are many different ideas about learning and teaching, and before we can understand an educational organization or its courses, of analyze them or evaluate them, it is necessary to be clear about ‘what particular philosophy is being emphasized ot adhered to.ey Components of a Distance Education System Figure 1.1 Systems Model for Distance Education a Learning Sources ———-» Design > Delivery ——> Interaction ——> Environment LL ft ‘Student Needs © Instructional» Print einstructors | * Workplape '* Organizations Design * Audio/Video * Tutors: + Home ‘*Theory/History * Media Recordings * Counselors * Classroom ‘Philosophy saan * Radio/Television «Administrative | © Learning Center + Bvaluation «Computer Staff Software aie ‘* Audioconferencing Students ‘+ Videoconferencing * Coinputer Networks Design of Courses Producing distance education courses involves many kinds of design expertise. Since instruction is provided through media and delivered by technology, the media materials need to be designed by individuals with a knowledge of in- structional principles and techniques as well as knowledge of the technology. While there are content experts who have both instructional design skills and knowledge of technology, itis better if these responsibilities are carried by dif- ferent specialists. The instructional designers should work with the content ex- perts and together agree on such matters as the objectives of the course, the ex: ercises and activities the learners will undertake, the layout of textual materials, the content of recorded audio- or videotapes, and the questions for interactive sessions by audio-, video-, or computer conference, Graphics designers, producers, and other media specialists should be brought in to turn the ideas of the content experts and instructional designers, (0 good-quality course materials and programs, Decisions must be made about which part of the instruction can most effectively be delivered by each particular medium, Finally, evaluation and research experts must plan how to evaluate individual student learning as well as the effectiveness of all aspects of the distance education course in order to ensure that it works—that is, meets’ the needs of students and the teaching organization and provides cost-effective instruction, ‘Because so many skills are needed to design a distance education course, one of the key characteristics of most successful distance education courses is that they are designed by course teams in which many specialists work together.10 cutapren 1 Fundamentals of Distance Fdueation Communication of Information and Interaction via Technologies In all education there has to be communication between a teacher or a teach- ing team, and the learner or learners. In distance education this communication takes place via some form of technology. The technology may produce printed tnedia (mainly books and study guides) or programs on audio- or videocas seites, radio or television broadcasts, computer software, audio, audio-graphic or videoconferencing, of computer networks (J.e., computer-mediated com- Gnunication), The use of technology to carry the messages of teachers and stu Gents, rather tban relying on face-to-face lecture, discussion, and the black- hoard, is what makes distance education so novel to most people, Ironically, the technologies that seem so challenging to so many educators are the same that they are fmmersed in when seeking information and entertainment Distinguishing Technology and Media When we talk about “technology,” we are describing not only the machines that distribute messages but also the organization and the people who make ‘them work. Technologies include the postal system, radio and television broad- casting companies, telephone, satellite, cable, and computer networks. What is Gistributed through the technologies are mediated messages, or symbol sys- tems, and these we usually refer to as “media.” The symbol systems (the media) that carry the messages by means of the distribution systems (the {echnology) are typically text in books and study guides, sound in audiotapes, pictures in videotapes, or the text, sound, or pictures that make up a telecon- ference. For example, the Internet is a technology, an organized network of com- puters, big and small, and users linked by telephone Jines of several types; the messages sent on it are usually in the text medium, though increasingly they sae uideo and audio media. The technology of mail distributes the media of printed words, data and pictures; sound on audiotapes; moving pictures and sound on videotapes; and all these on computer discs. The technology of radio soe television broadcasting distributes messages by sound, and pictures at ran- Jom through the aix By the technology of satelite, cable, telephone, and com- puter networks we can distribute text, sound and pictures from point to point Fr point to multipoints, so the messages may be aimed at particular groups or particular individuals. Correspondence by mail may include sound, text, or pic- tures by video, but is distributed mainly to individual leamers, ‘Thus, each technology can support the use of a variety of media: print (words and pictures), sound (voice and music), and video (pictures, sound, and motion). Each,megiuim, has different chayacteristies, which also vary according to the technology that distfibutes It, For example, -cerialganksnansiclaresy sa the-ways tpey.supportavarying degrees of ab- 3 sodial presence aud iuniaty. ahs ing degrees of-siruclurein téaching programs, of dialog between teachers and learners and among learners,——————————_ ———se Components of a Distance dueation System uM as well a8 difering degrees of self-directedness of the learners: ‘This is an im- portant theme that will be addressed further in Chapter 10. Interaction: The Role of Instructors ‘agin all education, itis important for distant learners 10 have euficen inter- As in inn thelr instructors to allow an appropriate degree of exchange of ideas act Jormation, Many educators also fel itis pedagogicallyim-povta tohave and inn between learners, The nature and extent of the jnracio that Would be deemed appropriate varies according to the organizational and de- signers’ teaching philosophy, the nature of the subject matte the maturity of se students, thelr location, an the media used in the course, saat the Key differences between distance and conventional education is. that 2a alstance education system its common fo the interaction ina SON tebe conducted by an instructor who is not one of the designe’* °° content ex- perts ofthe course. As explained above, in 9 folal systems ‘approach, courses Pere Olly designed by teams of instructional designers, media Pens and are font experts, The cost of such teams and the cost of media Is high, and the comabers of students that must take the course for it to be cost-effective is greater than in conventional education, Because of the large numbers, itis not Brestble forthe designers to also be the instructors, er, own a pedagogical point of view, is it destable they show be, since insteetion requires a special set of skills, diferent from 1056 of design- since I yubject experts, and is better done when it isthe work of persons ‘who rs an hemselves 10 the study and development and practice of hove skills sever he normal procedure in a total systems approach to distance education qeihat once the courses have been designed and delivered by correspondence, by tadlo or television, by satelite or computes, students 2 allocated by the Teaching organization to instructors, often. referred t9.2s BHO‘ ‘who interact een ee provide individualized instruction on the basis of the designed materials. ris eractions among instructors and students will be based on Tssice and questions determined by the course designers and ight be conducted in and thine by means of teleconference technologies, White the teleconference provides for very fast interaction, this interaction is usually in a group setting. arovde the United State, even today, interaction is most common'y achieved Sy means of written communications with a tutor through (Pe mail. In a total systems approach, the course design team sets assignments based on the con- eee eauh unit ofa cours, and the assignments ae undertaken by individual cenijents who send them to thelr personal tutors by mail, The tutors read, com songeniad return the assignments by mailto the students, and pers then dis- mnt py telephone or even in person. Even though the pace of this interaction fy mall may be slow, it is Inexpensive and allows fora high degree of individ- tualized attention for each student. ‘RA he future we are likely to see more use of desktop work salons that. comiine both textual interaction by computer and sometimes audio and video Communications simultaneously. These provide the same individualization as————————————————s craprer 1 Fundamentals of Distance Education the correspondence course, together with the teleconference’s immediacy of it. ee ehton, Such technologies, of course, ae still expensive today and not avail able to most distance learners. ‘AS wall as interacting with instructors whose main job isto help them learn the content of the course, students may also interact with counselors who make suggestions about study techniques or help to solve academic 0° personal problems that interfere with learning, Students will also interact with adminis- Pree stat when registering for courses or checking their progress. Ideally, @ tHetance education course also provides an opportunity for students to interact dint each other both synchronously by teleconferences, as they would in a tra: “ithoeal classroom setting, and asynchronously via computer bulletin boards snd matling lists, Correspondence-based distance education courses sometimes sisiade special face-to-face meetings 10 provide group interaction when de- signers determine that such interaction is necessary Management and Administration ‘Another aspect of interaction is the administration of distance education ane and programs. Managers are responsible for assessing the needs of Jearners who are not easily ‘accessible. Since distance education usually uses €x- onsie technologies, the funds required to produce courses are substantial and management must allocate ‘them among competing proposals. Administra- a at ensue that money, personnel, and time are managed so that courses 13e produced on time and numerous work tasks fit together. Suitable actly ar evpit must be recruited and trained. Since instructors are usually at dis- aitoes special procedures must be developed and maintained for monitoring rare pervising them. ¥eedback ait evaluaion mechanisms.are vital because vif typist oheaystem breaks down the'whole systemds‘injeopargye Management must also participate in the political process, helping poliey- makers to understand the potential of distance education, obtaining funding, dnd bringing about the organizational culture change that is needed to accom- ‘modate this new form of education. Learning Environments in any distance education organtzation, a great deal of attention must be siven we ane nature of the learning environment. Students may study course materi- vi and may interact with instructors in their workplaces, at home, in @ class, ae rata learning center, or even when they travel. Many stories are told Hout distant learners on battlefields, in submarines, in lighthouses, and in pris. ape Learning in such places and in the workplace or at home presents some Seal challenges because such settings are subject to many kinds of distractions and interruptions that make learning difficult. ‘To overcome these potential problems, students must consciously acquire the skills and hablis of being effective distant learners. They must, for exaty- bie; find their own times and places where they can study comfortably. This sens Se REO‘components of a Distance Education System B may mean scheduling a “training period” at work or a “quiet time” at home, jwith the cooperation of co-workers or family. The proper design of distance ed- ‘ication course materials can also affect the success of learning in the workplace or home. Most designers believe that courses should be organized into very Shott, self-contained segments with frequent summaries and overviews. Some emphasize the need to link academic content to real-life work, community, and home issues that will help students integrate their study with everyday prob- lems, so that instead of being distractions, these become part of theit learning. Counselors can be especially helpful in assisting distant learners to make the personal and social adjustments that Jearning at home requires. "The environment of students whose courses are delivered by teleconfer- encing is usually that of a small group in a classroom or conference room. To take advantage of such a setting, instructional designers should design activi ties that involve interaction among the members of each group, and perhaps liso interaction with groups at other sites. Its also desirable to have a “site co- érdinator” who ensures that the teleconferencing equipment is operating prop- erly and the room facilities are satisfactory. Again, there are certain skills that make learning in such environments more likely, and these skills can be con- sciously modeled by the instructor and monitored by the site coordinator. For example, how much “off microphone” talk to allow in an audioconference site is an issue that should not be avoided. If possible, learning centers should be located in geographic proximity to the student's home or workplace. These centers can then play many valuable roles, such as providing instructional materials and equipment, carrels for in- ‘lvidual study, or rooms for group meetings or private meetings with tutors or ‘counselors. In any event, learning centers need to be run by a knowledgeable Sdministrator who may need a support staff, depending on the center's siz Interdependence of Elements of a Distance Education System ‘The elements that we have introduced above—content or knowledge, design communications technologies, interaction, and learning environment and management—are essential to all distance education organizations and courses, Even with this cursory overview, it should be clear that there is a great ddeal of interdependence among these elements. For example, the exact nature of the design, the communications technology used for delivery, and the inter- fection depend on the sources of knowledge, the student needs, and the learn- ing environment in a particular course. Selection of a particular delivery tech- nology of combination of technologies should be determined by the content to pe taught, who is to be taught, and where the learning will take place. Design of the instructional media depends on the content, the delivery technology, the Kind of interaction desired, and the learning environmént. All these will be influenced by policy and management. Furthermore, changes in one compo- nent of a distance education system have immediate effects on all of the other ‘components.CHAPTER 1 Fundamentals of Distance Education Unfortunately, in most organizations today the careful design and manage- sent that should characterize a total systems approach are nonexistent. In most organizations it is one part of the system that is favored, and usually just one part of one part! Quite commonly, the communications technology receives the ‘money and attention, or more likely, an organization may focus its attention on just one of the many communications technologies that are available, Even the best communications experts will fail if the other elements of the system are neglected. A fundamental message of this book is that distance education should be conceived of and developed as a total system, giving equal attention to all the above interacting components if it isto be practiced successfully. Pay- ing attention to one of the components without regard to the others is a recipe for disaster. System Inputs and Outputs Another way of looking at the interrelationships among the components {in a distance education system is to use a common technique in systems mod- cling: viewing the system in terms of inputs and outputs. Figure 1.2 identifies some of the inputs and outputs of a distance education system. You can proba- bly think of others. Al the factors listed in the input column affect in some way the output vari ables we have listed. In some cases the relationship is quite direct, such as the case with instructor/tutor experience and student satisfaction ratings. Other re- lationships are less direct, such as the link between student access to resources and student achievement scores. Most relationships are multiple in nature; for example, student characteristics affect many of the output variables, whereas student completion rates are a function of many of the input factors. Indeed, with enough understanding of distance education, it is possible to identify a re- lationship between almost every input and output variable listed in Figure 1.2. The rest of this book is devoted to explaining these relationships in terms of the system components outlined in Figure 1.1 Different Levels of Distance Education and the Systems Approach ‘As we pointed out earlier, distance education courses can be offered by institu- tons with varying degrees of commitment and expertise. The systems approach {is more likely to be found in distance learning institutions or consortia than in courses at the program or unit level. While an individual teacher or group in a unit can try to be systematic, following a total systems approach requires more resources and organization than these people have available, As a result, the best distance education courses are more likely to be implemented at the insti- tutional or consortium level than the program or unit level. ‘Traditional institutions that try to offer distance learning courses typically face significant organizational conflicts, because a systems approach is not very compatible with traditional classroom instruction and the way such instruction‘ pistance Féucation Is About Change igure 2. Inputs and Outputs of Distance Education | raputs | | student Characteritios | | ‘» Instructor/Tutor Experience | + Competence of Administrative Sal | Sincere of Coune Development | | si reso Rees ee == — + Loe Ste Coortnation | iret + Relay of valuation ae | ne eo | » Student Completion Rates | — cep) Pal tines | «Quality Assessments 0, from a acest say location. Overall, distance education opens up many new learning OP portunities for many people. nites eedents wil have more freedom and opportunity, they must e180 25 some more responsibility for managing their own Tearnings in {erm of when they will study, how much they want to learn, and seeking Cv information ahd ine oes, Some students may be unwilling or inadequately trained to accept qhis sesponsibility and will need help in making the necessary adjustments in their study habits, ‘Dhereles of instructors and administrators willbe diferent in distatee ed- sacation systems in the fatuze compared to traditional classroom nets ry In seating ta distance education system, some sptructors wit have the job of preparing materials without being involved im interaction ‘with students, or if repo, they will have to use the communications techne/oglis and learn to ‘Rech quite diferent, Some instructors may be very reluctant 10 iT their physical contact with students or teach via media transmitted through technol- py. OF course good management will ind appropriate posters for those O8y. OF oho want to be content speciaists, those who Prepare to provice iy teachfve support to students, and those who are good at designing and pro- ducing mediated communications. aE aeasators 100 will perform different and new duties. Instead of Wor, zying about classroom availability and class scheduling, ey will be concerned aay aeeiing tat the verious resources are brought ogee fr the design and Triveny of courses 26 well as student suppor, They have to develop net ad seer procedures and find alternatives to “residency” as ertera Of excel- Passe Gome administrators may have difficulty understanding the shift in re sources and procedures involved. eee ar education also implies major changes within schools and raining organizations. With traditional classroom instruction, fhe st \dent body is pri seay defined by geography, with most students in schools and colleges tend- Tg to come from the local area, However, with distance edcsion ‘becomes possible for schools and training to reach students anywhers the country oF Poa igo, in theory, every school or taining group offering similar 1h aoe inn wil compete with each other, This is by no means a bad {hing key sors distance education is the principe of comparative advantage: AS applied see yneans that each school, university, or training group should decide are eubjects it has an advantage in, compared to competing organiza one, a ould specialize In providing instruction sn that subject, The future ae tional system will have no geographic boundary, ut each orgentsatter wate more focused and specialized inthe range of subjects it oles This will vey mean that all educational providers will need to rethink their ‘marketing, strategies.summary J summary 7 ‘Without having to worry about designing the conte presenting it teachers in @ Without Mjucaton system can concentrate their enerBles O° jaciitating learning. ‘as a result ofthese changes, the quality of sian education will continue to rige The higher quality wil be recognizable PSST ‘education courses are more open to public scrutiny than ‘raditional classroom instruction because They are delivered by mediated programs that oo ‘be accessed easily. This leads they Mw emphasis on quality and accountability for educational offerings and to aieanee education becoming increasingly eomPel ive with conventional education this chapter bas introduced some basic ideas abort distance education and proposed that a systems model js essenta) both the understanding and the epetie of distance edacation. The main poins aF° «4 eistance eduction institution, unit, program, CORSO an indi- 4. distorts canbe analyzed oF described ao a systeny “er includes ee learn- ree ind management, The more znegTaied ‘Deve TT practice, the Frater wil be the effectiveness ofthe distance education organization. eae18 CHAPTeR.1 Fundamentals of Distance Education + As organizations become more understanding about the benefits of adopt- ing a total systems approach to distance education, there will be impact omteachers, learners, administrators, and policymakers and significant changes in the way that education is conceptualized, funded, designed, nd detivered, Not least will be opening of access and improvements in quality. For further discussion about a systems approach to education, see Banathy (1993) oF Refgeluth and Garfinkle (1994).ee BIBLIOGRAPHY ‘Aim, M. (1972). Telephone instruction in distance ‘education. Bpistolodidactica, 2, 49-64. ‘Anderson, J, 8, (1992). A historical overview of {elecommunications in the health care industry. In NG, Moore (Ué.), Readings in Distance Education, 3, University Park, PA: ACSDE. “anderson, 7, & Mason, R. (1993). Intemational eom- puter conferencing for professional development: The Bangkok Project. American Journal of Distance Education, 72), 5-18. ‘Arias, A, Jt, & Bellman, B. (1990). Computes-medi Sted classrooms for culturally and linguistically verse learners. Computers-in-the-Schools, 7(3-2), 227-241 ‘armstrong, M., Toebe, D., & Watson, M. (1985). Strengthening the instfuctional role in self-directed ring activities. Journal of Continaing Edueation i Nursing, 163), 75-84 ‘Asian Development Bank (1986). Distance Béuention fie Asia and the Pacific: Proceedings of the 1986 Regional Serainar, Manila: The Asian Development Bank “pstia, A. W. (1978). Preventing Students From Drop ‘ping Out. San Prancisco: Jossey-Bass istman, K. 8. (1986). The role of conation (striving) jh the distance learning enterprise. American Journal fof Distance Education, 1(1}, 23~ “Axford, R. W. (1963). Lighty—Fountain of idealism, In C.A. Wedemeyer (Ed.), Brandenburg Memorial Essays on Correspondence Stady, vol. 1. Madison: ‘University of Wisconsin-Extension, Baath, J. (1981). Intoducing the personal tutor/courselor in the system of distance education. Hpistolodidactic, 1, 36-48. 264 Baldwin, TR, and MeVoy, D. S. (1988). Cable Cont ‘munication. Englewood Cis, NJ: Prentice Hall Bonathy, B. (1993). A Systems View of Education. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publi Barker, B. 0. (1987). The effects of learning by sate tite on vara schools, Paper presented at Learning by Satellite Conference, Tulsa, OK, April 12 (ERIC ED 284693). Barker, B. 0., & Dickson, M, W. (1993). Aspects of fuaccessful practice for Working with college faculty fp distance learning programs. Ed Journal, 82), 3-6. Barker, 8. 0., & Goodwin, R. D. (1992). Audlograph- fee: Linking remote classrooms. Computing Teacher, 19(7), 1-18. Barker, B.O., & Platten, M. R. (2989). Student per- ‘eptions on the effectiveness of college eredit courses taught via satelite, In M. G, Moore & G. C, Clarke (fe), Readings in Distance Learning and Instrac- tion. University Park, PA: ACSDB. Barry, M. & Runyan, G. (1995). A review of distance Tearing sudies in the U.S. rlitay, Pensacola: Uni versity of West Florida. Unpublished paper, Bates, A. W. (1984). The Role of Technology in Dis- tance Pauention. London: Croom Helm. Bates, A. W, (Nov, 1988). Technology for distance education: A 10-year perspective. Open Learning, 32. Bates, A. W. (19902), Interactivity as a criterion for ‘media selection in distance education. Paper pre ented to the Asian Association of Open Universities, [ERIC # ED 329245.minLiocRAPHY Bates, A. W. (29906). Media and Technélogy in Buro- pan Distance Education. Milton Keynes, UK: Open University, Batey, A., & Cowell, R, N, (1986). Distance Educa tion. An Overview Portland, OR: Northwest Regional Paucational Lab. (ERIC: ED 278519) Beare PL. (1989), The comparative effectiveness of ‘idectape, audiotape, and telelectime in delivering ontinulng teacher education. Amer, J. Dist, Bduc., 3(2), 87-66. ‘Reljet, E, (1972). A study of students’ preferences with regard to diferent models of two-way comaa- ations, Epistolodidactica, 2, 83-80. Berge, Z (1995), Evaluation of a computer confer iT osed for distance learning, Amer. J. Dist Bduc., in press. Berge, ZL & Collins, M. P. (1993). Computer con: ferencing and on-line education. ATachnet Blecronfc Journal on Vistual Culture, 2(8). (Archived at LIST- SERV@KENTVM as BERGE.VIN3). TBexge, Z., & Collin, M. (1995). Computer Mediated Communication and the Online Classroom, Cresskil, NJ; Bampton Press Berk, E., & Devlin, J, (1991), Hypertext/Hypermedia. Handbook, New York: McGraw Bilings, DM, (1989). A conceptual model of corte spondence course completion. In M. G. Moore, & G- C clark (Gds_), Readings in Distance Learning and Sstrietion, 2. University Park, PA: ACSDE, Bines, P.M, Dean, R, S., & Mellinger, A. E. (1994) Factors underlying distance learner satisfaction with {elevised college-level courses. Amer. J, Dist. Edu, (0), 60-71 Bittner, W.S. & Mallory, H. F (1933). University ‘Teaching by Bail. New York: Macmillan Blackwood, H., & Trent, C. (1968). A Comparison of the Bffetiveness of Ruceto-Fuce and Remote Teaching in. Communicating Educational Information 10 ‘hauls, Manhattan: Kansas State University, Cooper ative Extension Service. (ERIC: BD 028 324) Blanch, G. (1994), Don’t all faculty want their own. "Ty show? Barress to faculty participation in distance ‘education. DEOS, 4(0) Boone, M, E, (1984). Examining excellence: An nalvais of facilitator behaviors in actual avdio tele tonferences. In L. Parker & C. Olgren (Eds.),Telecor ferencing and Electronic Communications, I, Masi font University of Wisconsin-Extension, Center for Interactive Programs. 265 ‘Boone, M.., & Bassett, RE, (1988). Tvaining people {o audioconference: A review ofthe current wisdom. In L Parker & C, Olgren (Bds.), Teleconferencing and Blecronie Communications, Il. Madison: University Of Wisconsin-Extension, Center for Interactive Pro- grams. Boston, R. L, (1992). Remote delivery of instruction yin the PC and modem: What have we leamed? “Amer, J Dist. Bauc., 6(3), 45-87, ‘: Boswell, J.J., Macker, D. W,, & Hamlin, W.C. (1968). ‘elelectone: An experiment in remote teaching. Adult seadership, 16(9), 321-338. Boyd, R, & Apps, J. (1980), Redefining the Diseipine of Adult Hdacation, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Briggs, L. J., Gustafson, K. L., & Tillman, M. H, (1991), Instructional Design: Principles & Applica fons (nd Ba.) Englewood Cfis, NJ: Educational ‘Teehmology Publications, Bronstein, R., Gil, J., & Koneman, B. (1982). Tele conferencing: A Practical Guide to Teacking by Tee phone, Chicago: American Society of Clinical Patho ogists Pres. Brophy, M.,& Dudley, B. (1982). Patterns of distance teaching in teacher education, Journal of Education for Teaching, 8(2), 156-162. Bruning, R., Landis, M, Hoffman, E,& Grosskop, K £1393), Perspectives on an interactive satellite-based Janguage course, Amer. J, Dist. Bdu., 73), 22-38. Bruwelheide J. H. (1994). Distance education: Copy- ght issues. Ih B. Wills (Ed), Distance Béwcation: ‘Shutegies and Tools. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educa tional Technology Publications Burge, E., & Howard, J. L, (1990), Audio-conferene- ng un graduate education: A case study. Amer. J Dist, Edue., 42), 3-1. candy, PC. (1991). SelfDiretion for Lifelong Learn: fing. San Pranelsco: Jossey-Bass. Cannings, . R., & Finkel, L (1993). The Technology ‘Age Classroom. Wilsonville, OR: Franklin, Beedle & ‘Associates, Cars, R. (1984). Thailand's Open University. ICDE Bulletin, 5, 25-27 Castleberry, J (1989). Satelite learning—A vision for the future. NASSP Bulletin, 73(519), 35-41, ‘chpole, M. J. (1992). Classroom, open, and dis: tance teaching: A faculty view. Amer. J. Dist Educ, 6(3), 34-44, heng, H. C., Lehman, J., & Armstrong, P, (1991). Comparison of performance and attitude in tradi EEE \266 tional and computer conferencing classes, Amer. J. Dist. Hduc., 5(3), 51-59. Cchesteston, P. (2985), Curriculum control in distence ‘education, Teaching ata Distance, 26, 82-37 Christopher, G. R. (1982). The Air Force Institute of echmology—The Air Force reaches out through qadia: an update. Ip L. Parker & C, Olgren (Eds), TTeeconferencing and Electronic Commurdeations, 1. ‘Madison: University of Wisconsin-Extenslon, Center {or Interactive Programs, Chung, J, (1991). Televised teaching effectiveness: wo case studies, Educational Technology, 3103), 41-47. CCnunfie, X. (2993). An overview and prospect of fatelite television in China, In M. Seriven, R. Lundin ‘BY. Ryan (Eds), Distance Baucation forthe 2st Cere tury, Proceedings ofthe 6th ICDE World Conference, Bangkok, Thailand. chute, A. G., Balthazar, L. B., & Poston. C. 0. (1989) Learning from teletraining. in M. G. Moore & G. C. Clack (his), Readings in Distance Learning and Instruction, 2, University Park, PA: ACSDB, Chute, A. G., Hulik, M., & Palmer, C. (1987). Tele- {raining Productivity at ATAT. Presentation at Inter ‘ational Teleconferencing, Association Annual Con- Jention, Washington, DC. Cincinnati, OH: AT&T Communications. Car, (1993). Attitudes of higher edueation faculty awards distance education: A national survey. Amer 11 Dist. Bduc., 72), 19-33. (CNET Briefing (1994). Briefing on CNET videotele- training, Pensacola, FL: Naval Alr Station, Chief of Naval Education and Training. Cited by Barry and Runyan, opt. Coggins, C. (1989). Preferred learning styles and their {impact on completion of external degree programs. In MG. Moore & G, C. Clatk, (Eds), Readings in Dis- ance Learning and Instruction, 2. University Pari, A: ACSDE. ‘Coben, P.A., Kali J A. & Kulik, ©, C, (2982). Bd, Cetional ovtoomes of tutoring: A meta-analysis of findings. American Educational Research Journal 19(2), 237-248. Coldeway, D. 0. (1988). Methoriotogial issues n dls fance education research, Amer. J. Dist, Bac, S(2), 45-54, Coldeway, D, 0. & Spences, R. (1993). Curriculum ‘ond Instrtional Delivery Issues for a Masters Degree fn Distance Education, Proceedings of the Ninth ‘Aonual Conference on Distance Teaching and Learn- fing. Madisan: University of Wisconsin. BIMLIOGRAPHY coldeway, D. 0, & Spencer, R. B. (1982), Keller's per- Sonalized system of instruction: The search for a posle distance leeraing paradigm. Distance Hdwea tion, 3(1), 51-71 Cole, 8, Coats, M., & Lentell, H. (1986), Towards food teaching by correspondence. Open Learning, 10). Cookson, B.S. (1990). Persistence in dlatance ediuce tion, In M. G, Moore (84.), Contemporary Issues in “Ammerlaan Distance Bueatfon. Oxford: Pergamon. ‘Cookson, P. $., Quigley, B. A, & Borland, K. We {1994), Audioconferencing in Major Resear Univer- itles; A National Survey, Proceedings, Intemational Distance Education Conference. State College: Penn State University. Coombs, N. (1990, Feb), Computing and telecom ‘munications in higher education: A personal view. ‘Educational Technology, 46-47. ‘Coughlan, R. (1980). The mentor role in individual~ aed instruction at Empire State College. Distance Education, 10), 1-12, Crick, M, (1980). Course teams: Myth and actuality. Distance Education, 1(2), 127-142 Cross, P, (1981), Adults as Leamers. San Francisco: Jassey-Bass. ‘Curtis, 3, A., & Bledenbach, J. M. (1979). Bdueational ‘Plecommunieations Delivery Systems. American Society for Engineering Education, Coys, T., & Smith, F, (2990). Teleclass Teaching: A Resource Guide (2nd Bd.). Las Cruces: New Mexico State University. Daniel, 3. 8., & Marquis, C. (1979). Independence fand interaction: Getting the mixture right. Teacing fata Distance, 18, 29-44, Davis, D. J. (1990). Text comprehension: tmplica- tions for the design of selF-nstructional materials. In IM. G, Moote (Ba), Contemporary Issues in American Distance Eduction. Oxford: Pergamon, Davis, $., & Eliot, C. 8, (1992). Whose job is tele ‘conference reception? In M, G. Moore (Bd), Readings fn Distance Education, 3, University Park, PA: ACSDE, ‘Deaton, R. & Clark, F, (1987). Teleconferencing and programmed instraction in rural Montana: A ease ‘ample in foster cae education. Human-Servcesi- the Rurat-Bnaironment, 10(3), 14-17. ‘Dede, C. (1990). The evolution of distance learning: ‘Pechnology-mediated interactive learning, Journcl of Research on Computing in Education, 22(3), 247-264.BIBLIOGRAPHY DeLoughy, 7. (1988, Apri 6) Interest rises sn satel- Iie links to foreign colleges. Chronicle of Higher Hus cation. ‘Demiray,U, (1994). A Review of the Literature on the (Open Education Faculty (1982-1992). Eskisehi, Turkey: Anadolu University. Dick, W., & Carey, L, (1985). The Systematic Design of instruction, Glenview, I: Scott, Foresman & Co. Die, G, (1990, Jan.), Reoent research activities of ‘the USAF Extension Course Institute (ECD), Research sn Distance Education, 2{1), 16-19, Dillon, C. (1992). The study of distance education in the United States: Programs of study and coursework, ‘Amer, J. Dist Bauc., 62), 64-69. Dillon, C. Li, & Walsh, 8. 3, (1992). Faculty: The neglected resource in distance education. Amer. J Dist, Bane, 6(8), 5-21 DiPaolo, A. (1992). The Stanford Instructional Televi- sion Network: A partnership with Industry. Hd, 6(7), 4 irs, P. J, (1991), Understanding television-based ds tance education: Identifying bartiers to university attendence. Research in Distance Education, 30), 24, Doerfert F. Schueme R., & Tomaschewski,C. (1989) ‘Short Descriptions of Selected Distance Education Jnstiations, Hagen, Germany: Insitute for Research Sto Distance Education, Downing, D. B, (1984). Survey on the Uses of Dis tance Learning in the U.S, Austin, TX: Southwest Edtcational Lab, (ERIC: ED 246874) Duchastl, P. (1988). Toward the ideal study guide: {An exploration of the fonctions and components of study guides. British Journal of Educational Technol. gy, 14(3}, 216-231. Day, T. M, & Waller, R. (1985). Designing Usable ‘Texts. New York: Academic Press, ‘Duning, B. ., Van Kekerix, M. J., & Zaborowsid, L M, (1993). Reaching Learners Through Teecommat- cations, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Dutton, W,, & Lievrouw, L, (1982). Teleconferencing as an educational medium, In L, Parker & C. Olgren (Bs), Teleconferencing and Electronic Commurica- tions, Madison: University of Wisconsin-Extension, Center for Interactive Programs. Eekles, S., & Miller W, (1987), Perceptions of 1987 ‘Master Gardener Participants Toward the Use of Sate. Tite Telecommunications for Educational/Extension Delivery. (ERIC: ED289042) 267 Egan, M. W., Welch, M., Page, B., & Sebastian, J. (1993). Learners’ pereeptions of instructional deliv- cry systems: Conventional and television, Amer. J Dist. Educ, 612), 47-56. Fisley, M. E, (1992). Guidelines for conducting ‘instructional discussions on a computer conference. DBOSNEWS, 211). blletson, EK., Wyera, D., & Jolley H. (1987). Report on Distance Learning: A National ffectiveness Sur- bey. Mansfield, PA: Mansfield University and the Pennsylvania Teleteaching Project. England, R, (1991). A Survey of State Level Involve. ‘ment in Distance Sducation a the Elementary and Secondary Levels, ACSDE Research Monograph, 3, University Park, PA: ACSDE, Evans, 7, & Nation, D. (1989). Critical Reflections on [Distance Education. New York: Falmer Press, Fait, K, (1988). Toward New Horizons for Women in Distance Education: International Perspectives. Lon- don: Routledge, eastey, C, (1983). Serving Learners at a Distance: A Guide to Program Practice. Washington DC: ASHE [ERIC Higher Education Research Report No.5. easly, C, (1984), Independent Study in 1983: A Research Report of the NUCEA Independent Study Division. Stilwater; Independent Study Division NUCEA, Oklshoma State University Flagg, B. (1990), Formative Evaluation for Bavca tional Technologies. Hillsdale, NJ: Exfbaum, Fleming, A, (1982). The Allama Iqbal Open Univer. sity. in G, Rumble & K. Harry, The Distance Teaching Universities. London: Croom Helm. Florida Satellite Network Study (1985), Report and ‘Recommendations ofthe Florida Postsecondary Edu- cational Planning Commission Fredrickson, S, (1990). Audiographics for Distance Education: An Alternative Technology. Paper pre- sented at the Annual Conference of the Alaska Asso- tiation for Computers in Bducation. (ERIC: D34571) Freeman, R. (1991). Quality assurance in learning materials production. Open Learning. Brey, L., & Reigeluth, C, M. (1986). Instructional ‘models for tutoring: A review. Journal of Instruc: tional Development, 1(1), 28. Furlong, M., & Kearsley, G. (1993). Computers for Kids Over 60, San Francisco: Seniomet Gagne, R. M., Briggs, LJ, & Wagner, E.D. (3988) Principles of Instructional Design (2nd Ed,). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.268 Gao, F. (1991). The challengé of distance education in China, Amer J. Dist, Educ, 5(2), 54-S8. Gardner, M. K,, Rudolph, $., & Della-Piana, G. (1987). Learning over the lines: Audio-graphic tele- conferencing comes of age. Educational Technology, 210), 392. Garrison, D. R, (1987). Researching dropout in dis- tance education, Distance Education, 8(1), 95-101. Garrison, D.R, (1989). Understanding Distance Bat ‘ation: A Framework for the Future, Boston: Rout- ledge & Kegan Paul Garrison, D. R. (1990), At analysis and evaluation of auioteleconfereacing to facilitate education ata dis tance. Amer J. Dist, Educ, 4(3), 13-24 Garrison, R, & Baynton, M, (3987). Beyond indepen- dence in distance education: The concept of control, ‘Ammer. J. Dist, Bdue, 3(0), 3-15, Garson, R, & Shale, D. (1987). Mapping the bound aries of distance education; Problems in defining the field, Amer. J Dist. Bduc,, 1(3), 7-18, Gayeski, D. M. (1993). Multimedia for Learning. [Englewood Clifs, NJ: Educational Technology Publi- cations. Gery, G. (1990), Hletronic Performance Support Sys- tems, Boston: Weingarten Publishers Gibbs, G., & Durbridge, N. (1976). Characteristis of Open University tutors. Teaching at a Distance, 7, TR. Gibson, C. C, (1990). Learners and learning: A dis- ‘cussion of selected research. In M. G. Moore (Bd), Contemporary Issues in American Distance Educa ton. Oxford: Pergamon. Gilbert, J. K., Temple, A. & Underwood, C. (1991). Satelite Television in Education. New York: Rout!- ledge. Gilcher, X. W. & Johnstone, S. M. (1989). A Critical Review of the Use of Audiographic Conferencing Sys tems by Selected Educational Institutions, College ark, MD: Intemational University Consortium. lattes, R. & Wedell, E.G. (1971). Study by Corre- spondence. London: Longmans, Gooler D, (1979). Evaluating distance education pro- grammes, Canadian Journal of University Continating Edncation, 6(1), 43-58. Gunawardena, C, N, (1992). Changing faculty roles {or audlographics ané online teaching, Amer, J Dist due., 6(3), 58-71. Haaland, B.A., & Newby, W. G, (1984), Student per- ception of effective teaching behaviors: An examina on of conventional and teleconference based instruction, In L, Parker & C. Olgren (8ds.), Tlecon- om | BIBLIOGRAPRY {erencing and Electronic Communications 11. Madi son: University of Wisconsin-Extension, Center for Interactive Programs. Hackman, M., & Welker, K. (1990). The impact of systems design and instructional style on student reactions to distance education. Research in Distance Baducation, 22), 7-8. Hansen, E., Chong, $., Kubota, K., & Hubbard, L. (0993). Computer conferencing for collaborative Jearning in large college classes, DEOSNEWS, 3(4), Harasim, L. (2994). Global Networks, Cambridge, (MA: MIT Press. Harasim, L. (1990), Online Education: Perspectives on ‘a New Broironment. New York: Praeger. Harris, D. (1987). Openness & Closure in Distance Education, London: Falmer Press. Harrison, P,J., etal, (1990). Development ofa dis tance education assessment instrument. ETRAD, 39(4), 65-77. Hany, K., & de Vockt, . (1988)..Buropean Associa tion of Distance Teaching Universities. Milton Keynes, UK: International Centre for Distance Learning. Hartigan, P, & St, John, R. K. (1989). AIDS training. in thini-world countries: An evaluation of telecon ‘munications technology. Educational Technology, 29(20), 20-23. Harley, D, (1992). Anna Ellot Ticknor introduced studies at home. Als: Newsletter ofthe Independent Study Division, NUCEA. Hartley, J. (1978). Designing Instructional Text. Lon- don: Nichols. Haaland, 8. A., & Newby, W. G. (1984). Student per- ‘ception of effective teaching behaviors: An examnina- tion of conventional and teleconference based Instruction, In L. Parker & C. Olgren (Eds), eecon- ferencing and letronic Coramunications, Ill. Madi- son: University of Wisconsin-Extension, Center for Interactive Programs. Heinich, R. M., Molenda, M., Russell, J. R. (1985), Instructional Media and the New Technologies. New York: Macmillan, Heinzen, TE, & Albetico, &, M, (1990). Using a cre atvity paradigm to evaluate teleconferencing. Amer. J. Dist, Educ, (3), 3-12. Henderson, E. §., & Nathenson, M. B. (1984), Inde- pendent Learning-in Higher Education. Englewood CCilfs, NI Educational Tecnology Publications. Her Majesty's Stationery Oifice (HMSO) (1965). The (Open University: Report of the Planning Committee to ‘he Secretary of State for Education and Science. Lon ‘don: HMSO.—— BIBLIOGRAPHY Hezekiah, J. A. (1986), Teletechniques: A case study {n implementation and evaluation. In L. Parker & C. Olgren (Eds.), Teleconferencing and Blectroniz Com munications, V. Madison: University of Wisconsin- ‘Bxtension, Center for Interactive Programs. Hezel, R. T, (1987). Statewide Planning for TBlecom munications in Education. Syracuse: Hezel Associ- ates, Hilt, 8. & Turoff, M. (1993). The Network Nation: (Rev. Ba.) Boston, MA: MIT Press. Holmberg, B. (1977). Tutoring distance students. Fpistolodidactica, 7, 4-15. Holmberg, B. (1981) Statue and ‘ends of Distance Education. London: Kogan Page. Holmberg, B. (1986). Growth and Structure of Dis- tance Bdtzcation, London: Croom Helm, Holmberg B, (1989). Theony and Practice of Distance ‘Education, New York: Routledge. Holmberg, R. G., & Bakshi, 7. S, (2992). Postmortem fon a distance education course: Successes and fatl tures, Amer. J Dist. Educ.,6(1), 27 39. Holstein, J. A. (1992), Making the written word speak Reflections on te teaching of correspon dence courses. Amer, J. Dist, Educ, 63), 22-34. Hosley, D. L., & Randolph, 8. L, (1993). Distance Leaming as a Training and Eucation Tool. Kennedy Space Center, FL: Lockheed Space Operations Co. (ERIC: BD355036) Hough, M, (1984). Motivation of adults: implications Of adult learning theories for distance education. Dis- tance Education, 5(2), 723. Howard, D. C. (1987). Designing learner feedback in Gistance edveation, Amer J. Dist, Eu, 3(1), 24-40. Hoyt, D. P, & Frye, D. (1972). The Effectiveness of ‘Teecommuications as an Educational Delivery S)S- tem. Manhattan: Kansas State University (ERIC, ED 070 318) : deus, R. M, (1992). Enhancing teletutorials via col- laborative leaning: The Malaysian expertence. DBOSNEWS, 2(14). niyin, V, (1983), The U.S.8.R. Financial and Beonomte Institute for Distance Education. Distance Bdcation, 40), 142-148 Inwin, S. (1992). The Business Television Directory Washington, DC: Warren Publishing Inc. and Irwin Communications. Y9C (1995), Federal Disability Law and Distance ‘Learning. Washington, DC: International Telecom ‘munications Counell, American Assoc, Community Colleges. 269 lansiv, 2. (1987). Three major events in higher dis- tance education: News from China. ICDE Bulletin, 13, 18-20. Jianshu, Z, (1990). Distance education research in ‘China, Research in Distance Education, 2(2),9. Johnson, D. A. (1989, August). Training by televi Son. Staining & Development Journal, 65-68, Jobunston, J. & Braeainsk, E. (1992). Taking the mea- ture of Channel One: The first year, Ed, 6(6), 4-9. « SJonassen, DK, (1982, 1985). The Technology of Txt Vols. 18 i, Englewood Cills, NI: Educational Tech nology Publications, Jonassen, D. H. (1989). Hypertext/Hypermedia. ‘Englewood Cliffs, NI Educational Technology Publi- calions. Jonassen, D., & Mandl, H, (1990). Designing Hyper media for Learning, New York: Springer Verlag, “Jones, G. (1991). Make.All America a School. Engle- ‘wood, CO: Jones International Jordahl, G. (1989). Communications satellites: A ural response to the tyranny of distance. Eduoational ‘ectnology, 25(2), 34-38. Jllussen, K.P, &Jullussen, B,J. (1993). 6th Annnat Computer Industry Amando, Lake Tahoe: Computer Industry Almanac, Ine. Kascus, M. (1994). What library schools teach about brary support to distant students: A survey. Amer. J Dist, Pac, (0), 20-35. aye, A., & Rumble, G, (1981). Distance Teaching for Higher and Adult Education. London: Croom Helm, Ke Ming, G, (1988). The perspective of distance ed cation in China, In D, Sewart & J. Daniel (Bds.), Developing Distance Education. Oslo: International Council for Distance Baucation. Kearsley, G. (1985). Training for Tomorrow: Distribx tuted Learning Through Computer and Communica tions Technology. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Kearsley, G., Huntes, B., & Furlong, M. (1992). We ‘Teach With ‘Technology. Wilsonville, OR: Franklin, Beedle & Associates. Kearsley, G., & Lynch, W. (1994). Preparing Buca onal Technology Leaders: A Formaita That Works, ‘Technology and Teacher Education Annual. Char- Tottesvill, VA: Association for the Advancement of ‘Computing in Bdveation. Keegan, D. (1980), On defining distance education, Distance Education 1(1), 13-38 Keegan, D. (1986). The Foundations of Distance Bw. cation, London: Croom Helm.270 Keegan, D. (1989). Problems in defining the field of Glstance education. Amer, J. Dist. Bue, 302), 4-U, Keegan, D. (1993). Theoretical Principles of Distance Eatucation. London: Routledge. Keene, SD, & Cary 1-. (1990), ffectiveness of is tance education approach 10 U.S. Army Reserve com ‘ponent taining, Amer. . Dist Bdue., 4(2), 14-20. emir, D (1989). An illustration, with ease studies, ff a linear process mode! of drop-out from distance education, Distance Eduention, 10(2), 196-20. ember, D, (1995). Open Learning Courses for Adults Englewood Ciifs, NI: Educational Technology Publl- Klinger, 7 H,, & Connet, M. R. (1992, Oct). Design- ing distance learning courses for critical thinking, ‘THE Journal, 87-30, Rnapezyk, D. R, (1990), Use of audiographic tech nology in distance education of practicing teachers, Eaducational Tecnology. 30(6}, 24-27. Knapezyik, D. (1991) A distance learning approact to Inservice training, THE Journal, 18(9), 68-70. Knott, D. (1993) Distance education effectiveness Ba Journal, 76), 7- Knowles, M, (1978), The Adult Learner. Houston, ‘TX: Gulf Publishing. Koul, B. (1989). Beyond interaction and indepé ‘dence: the IGNOU experience. In A. Talt (d.), ater faction and Independence: Student Support in Dis- tance Fducation and Open Learning. Milton Keynes, UK: Open Univers. Krebs, A. (1991, Mar). Funding and p in dlstance learning. Ed, 5(3), 9-14. Xeruh, J. (1983). Stndent evaluation of instructional teleconferencing, In L. Parker & C. Olgren (Eds), ‘Pleconferencing and Electronic Communications 1 ‘Madison: University of Wlsconsin-Extension, Center {or Inezactive Programs. Kuramoto, A. (1984). Teleconferencing for nurses: Evaluating it effectiveness. In L. Parker & C. Olgren. (Bde), Teleconferencing and slectronic Commeunica- tions, IL. Madison: University of Wisconsin-Exten sion, Center for Interactive Progrems. Laidlaw, B, & Layard, R. (1974). Traditional versus (Open University teaching methods: A cost compari son. Higher Bdneaton, 3, 439-468, Lane, C. (19924). A selection model and pre-adoption evaluation instrument for video programs. In M. G. ‘Moore (Fd), Readings in Distance Education, 3. Ut versity Pan PA: ACSDE, BIBLIOGRAPHY Lane, C, (19920). The IBM approach to training through distance learning: A global education net ‘work bythe year 2000, Ba, 6(1), 10-1. Latham, 5. Slade, A., & Budnick, C, (1991). Library Sonics for Off-Campus and Distance Béncation: An ‘Annotated Bibliography. Chicago: American Library ‘Assoe. Lauzon, A. C. (1992). Integrating computer-based {struction with computer conferencing: An evalua tion ofa mode! for designing online education, Amer, 5 Dist, Hue, 6(2), 3246 Lauzon, A.C. & Moore, G.A.8. (1989). A fourth gen- tration distance education system: Integrating com- puter asisted learning and computer conferencing "Amer, J Dis, Edu, 3(), 38-48, ‘Lenn, M. P (1991) Dstange Learning and Accred ton, Washington, DC! Council on Postsecondary ‘sccredtalon. Leshin, CB, Pollock, 6 Rigel, C, M, (1992) ‘nstrctonal Design Statetes and Tactics, Bogle ‘wood Clif, Ni: Héveational Technology Publica: tions. Levenson, W. B. (1948). Teaching Trough Radio New York: Forar& Rinehar. Levine, TX. (2988). Teaching Teleourses; Opportunt fies and Options, Washington, DC: Annenberg/CPB. Levine, K. (1992). Going the Distance: A Handbook for Developing Distance Degree Programs. Washinge ton, De: Annenberg/ CPB. Lewis C., & Hedegaard, (1993), Online education: Issues and some answers. THE Journal, 209), 68-7 Lewis, , (1992), Approaches to staff development in pen lamning The role of competence framework. Open Learning, 7,78 p20 Lochte, R. H. (1992). Interactive Television and inaction. Englewood Ciifs, NI: Educational Te’ nology Publications Ludlow, N. (1967). Speaking personally with Micha Lambert, Amer. J Dist. Edu, 1(2), 67-7 MacKenzie, O., Christensen, B. L.. & Righy, P. He {i968}. Comecpondence Instruction in the United States, New Yorke MeGrew-H, MacKenzie, N.,Postgate,R & Scupham, J. (1978). Open Learning: Systems and Problems tn Pos See dary Education, Pars; UNESCO Press. -Majos, M. B., & Shane, D. L. (1992). Use of interac: tive television for outreach nursing education. In M, G. Moore (Ed), Readlngs in Distance Education, 3. University Par, PA: ACSDE,bIBLIOGRAPHY Malan, R. F, & Faller, 8. (1992). Establishing works Toad equivalence: U.S. independent study courses ind college residence classes. Amer. J. Dist. Educ, 6(2), 56-63. ‘Mark, M, (1990). The diferentiation of institutional Structures and effectiveness in distance education programs. In M, G. Moore (Ba), Contemporary Issues In American Distance Education. London: Pergamon. Mastin, 2, & Rainey L, (1993). Student achievement and atinude in a saiellite-delivered high school fourse, Amer, J, Dist. Educ,, 70}, 54-61. Martin, C. M, (1993). Oklahoma's Star Schools: Equipment use and benefits two years after grant’s end. Amer, J. Dist, Hduc., 7(3), 51-60. Mason, R. (1987). Computer conferencing: Its conti- bution to self-directed learning. Paper presented & the Second Guelph Symposium an Computer Confer- fencing. Guelph, Canada. Mason, R, (1991). Moderating educational computer conferencing, DBOSNEWS, 1(19) ‘Mason, R., & Kaye, A. (1989), Mindweave: Commu- cation, Computers and Distance Education, Oxfor Pergamon, Massoumian, B, (1989), Successful teaching via two sway interactive video, TechTrends, 34(2), 16-19. Meziveen, L., & Roberts, S. (1992). Telelearning: A Second Look, 1990-1951, 1991-1992. (ERIC ED355934) MeGowan, J. (1992). Distance education as a Hredum for promoting the college preparation of ‘tenance of minority students. DEOSNEWS, 2(8). MoGreal, R. (1993). Exemplary programs of see- Sndary distance education in Canada. DEOSNEWS, 30) ‘Mclsaae, M. S. (1990). Problems affecting evaluation Of elstance education in developing countries. Research tn Distance Education, 23), 12-16. McMehill, J. M. (1993). Videotape distance learning Courses: Adiminstrative implications for colleges and ‘universities. Bd Journal. 76), 16-20. ‘MeNeil, D. R. (1980). UMA: Progress of an expeti trent, 1 M. N. Chamberlain (Bd.), Providing Conti iting Education by Media and Technology. Sam Prat ‘sco: Jossey-Bass, ‘Meacham, D. (1990). Research and development at Ghaties Sturt University Distance Education Centre Research in Distance Education, 2(1), 2-6 Miller, G. E. (1992). Longeterm trends in distance ‘education. DEOSNEWS, 2(23), 271 Misanchuk, E. R. (1992). Preparing Instructional ‘Text: Document Design Using Desktop Publishing. Englewood Cliffs, Ni Educational Technology Publi- cations. Moore, D. M., Burton, J. K., & Dodh, N. R. (1991). ‘The role of faciators in Virginia's Electronic Class- room project. Amer, J. Dist. Hduc, (3), 29-39. Moore, M. G. (1972). Learner autonomy: the second ‘mension of independent learning. Convergence, 5), 76-88, Moore, M. G. (1973), Towards a theory of indepen ‘ent Jeaming and teaching. Journal of Higher Bdwca- tion, (44), 661-679. ‘Moore, M. G. (1975). Cognitive style and telemathlc falstance) teaching, IOCE Newsletter 5(4), 3-10. ‘Mote, M, G. (1977). A model of independent study. pistolodidacton, (1), 6-40. ‘Moore, M, G, (1980a). On a Theory of Independent Study, ZIBP Papiere No. 16, Hagen, Germany: Fer Universitit Moore, M. G, (19800), Continuing education and the dosessment of eamer needs. Teaching at a Distance, 17, 26-28. Moore, M. G. (1961). Educational telephone net~ ‘works, Teaching ata Distance, 19, 24-32. ‘Moore, M. G. (1983). On a theosy of independent uly, in D. Sewart, D. Keegan, &B. Holmberg (225. Distance Education: International Perspectives. Lon- don: Croom Helm. ‘Moore, M, G. (1986). Selfdirected learning and dis tance education, Journal of Distance Bduention, 1(1), 7-24. Moore, M.G, (1987), Print media, InJ. A. Niemi & D. Goole (Bas), Teshnologies for Learning Ontside the Classroom: New Directions for Continuing Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Moore, M. G. (1988). Telecommunications, interna- Honatism and distance education. Amer. J. Dist. Bane, 2{0),1-7. ‘Moore, M.G. (1989). Recruiting and retraining adult Students in distance education. In P. 8. Cookson (ba), Reeniting and Retraining Adult Students, San Francisco Jossey-Bass ‘Moore, M. G. (1989b). Three types of interaction, “Amer. J, Dist Fduc., (2), 1-6. ‘Moore, M. G. (29902). Recerit contributions to the ‘heory of distance education. Open Learning, 5(2}, 10-15.