Introduction

American higher education began with the establishment of Harvard College in Cambridge, Massachusetts in 1636. That early college was an attempt to duplicate the British colleges of Oxford and Cambridge. Since that time, several events, happenings, or influences have altered American higher education and have caused it to evolve into what it is today. In the most general terms, the university in the United States today is patterned on the undergraduate level after the British model of a college and on the German university as a graduate school. In addition to these two influences, the current organizational pattern of the American university includes additional structures accommodating the education and training of engineers, teachers, business practitioners, and others. The latest influence in the evolution of higher education in the United States is computer technology. By extension, the internet has become a tool by which a huge investment of time and energy is being made in attempting to provide instruction to students regardless of where they might be located. The term, Distance Education, has been used extensively to label such efforts but apparently is being replaced by the term, Distance Learning. By whatever term this effort might be known, it has introduced a new paradigm of educational offerings in the United States. It has its supporters and its detractors and each of these camps is quite vocal and certain in its views about the benefits of Distance Education or Distance Learning.

This paper will review various efforts in the arena of Distance Education and will identify those cautions which must be in place if Distance Education efforts are to be successful. It will also identify some of the controversies associated with Distance Education efforts in the United States. While the content of this paper will focus primarily on the United States, it is clear that Distance Education is a subject of much interest on a global basis; thus, the cautions identified here might well apply wherever and whenever any university anywhere attempts to offer training, education, or learning to students who are removed from the primary locale of instruction.

Controversy and Experimentation

Even a brief sampling of the journalistic discussion of Distance Education shows an unmistakable mix of enthusiasm, caution, and in some cases, outright rejection of this mode of instructional delivery.

An example of enthusiasm and endorsement is the “Distance Education Policy” produced by the Academic Policy and Planning Committee at San Diego State University in the United States. (1) This policy defines Distance Education “as a formal educational process in which the majority of the instructional interaction occurs when student and instructor are in the same place.” It further stipulates that it applies to “…all credit-bearing courses and programs offered through distance education by San Diego State University, including those offered as Special Sessions through the College of Extended Studies.” Officials at San Diego State University believe that their policy is one of the more detailed such policies in American higher education. Among its requirements will be found that:

• Professors must exercise oversight over distance courses in their fields.
• Students must have “substantial, personal, and timely” interaction with faculty members and with other students.
• Faculty members and the university must agree who owns the content of a course before it begins.
• Students must be assured of access to appropriate resources and services when taking a course from a distance.
• Full-time faculty members must not be replaced by part-time distance-education instructors. (2)

Overall, the policy is a carefully articulated statement designed to govern all facets of any

Distance Education effort undertaken by anyone at San Diego State University. Of particular interest here is the policy requirement that Distance Education program administrators will ensure that students have adequate access to and support in the use of appropriate library resources and also have access to laboratories, facilities, and equipment appropriate to courses and programs.

Apparently, the San Diego State University policy was in part motivated by an earlier visit to that campus by David Noble, a professor of History at York University in Toronto, Canada, an outspoken critic of online education. According to Treacy Lau, the university’s principal coordinator for distributed learning, the policy is in part the result of strengthened resolve resulting Mr. Noble’s visit and a strengthened interest on the part of the faculty to establish guidelines for their institution’s offerings. (3)

A most interesting discussion of Mr. Noble and his attack on Distance Education appeared in a recent issue of “The Chronicle of Higher Education.” (4) Jeffrey R. Young, the writer, characterized Mr. Noble’s views in some detail and even included selections from each of four essays in Noble’s “Digital Diploma Mills” series.

Others, perhaps not as vocal as Noble, have found their experiences with various facets of online learning less than satisfactory. This was the experience of two professors at the Stevens Institute of Technology who learned that many of their online students have little interest in online chats or other synchronous activities associated with their course work. These two professors found that their students apparently value flexibility in their schedules and dislike the fact that online chats occur at fixed times. (5)

Yet another professor, John Zikopolous, a professor of chemistry at Mesa Community College, in Mesa, Arizona has found dissatisfaction with his online teaching experience. He was approached by several students who requested that they be allowed to take his introductory-level chemistry course online. He thought their reasons to be valid as several of the students had young children who needed care, and another had a work schedule which made it impossible for him to attend classes. He worked to put his lectures and course materials online and began the Web version of the course with five students. Mr. Zikopolous criticizes himself for much of the unsatisfactory experience with this course and sees it as having failed partly because of his own teaching style. He also questions whether online learning will work for less than highly motivated students. (6)

Further published reports discussed varying views of Distance Education. Christine Maitland, higher-education coordinator for the National Education Association found, to her disappointment, that she couldn’t just sit down, sign on, and start learning. First, she had to download software for three different education-technology courses offered by two different institutions. Ms. Maitland saw technology as a barrier, leaving her wondering whether she might have been better off on campus. (7)

The foregoing, albeit brief, serves to illustrate the state of flux in which the evolution of Distance Education is in, at least in the United States. Nevertheless, the majority view is that experimentation is of value and that beneficial results will eventually surface. Various leaders in American higher education are highly supportive of Distance Education while acknowledging the array of policy questions that still have to be answered. One such leader is James V. Koch, president of Old Dominion University in the state of Virginia in the U.S. Old Dominion has developed an extensive sattelite-based system named Telechnet which serves some 5,000 students each year. Students can complete their degrees by taking their third and fourth year courses at Telechnet sites set up at community colleges, military bases, and business facilities in various states. (8) He sees various obstacles, however, and among these are other college presidents who he believes do not relish competition from other institutions. Another group perceiving competition is teachers’ unions who think they might lose their jobs.

Higher education, in the United States and elsewhere, is undergoing tremendous change because of the development and evolution of technology and globalization. The future would seem to be a scenario of distance being meaningless and online courses mixing on-campus, off-campus, and international students. While many in the higher education community feel strong apprehensions about the impact of technology and Distance Education, others embrace this impact with enthusiasm. While some view the growth of online education and the entry of new providers of education as indicating more garbage and more trendiness, others see these trends as presenting new opportunities for educators to renew debates about how students can best learn.

By way of acknowledging the mixed views and the ambiguities associated with technological impact and the endorsement of online learning, the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation has hired Ira H. Fuchs, Princeton University’s vice president for computing and information technology for the newly created position of vice president for research in information technology. In this position, Mr. Fuchs will direct the foundation’s expanding investigations of digital technologies that can be applied to teaching and to research. (9)

With all of the discussion, anxiety, enthusiasm, support for, and condemnation of Distance Education employing technology, it is not all surprising that many of those who have studied this topic in depth are cautious. One such scholar is Rob Kling, a professor of information systems and information science at Indiana University. He has studied the social aspect of computerization since the 1970s and has been vocal and specific in warning that Distance Education be undertaken with care, because everyone is very much in an experimental phase and universities have much to learn. Among the problems of online learning, Kling argues that such courses often require new pedagogies. He points out that, instead of speaking, instructors and students are writing and that writing is much slower. While he in no sense disparages Distance Education efforts, he does recommend caution because, again, of the fact that these efforts are presently very much in an experimental phase.

Examples of other efforts in the arena of caution include a recent study of top Distance Education programs resulting in the compilation of a list of twenty-four benchmarks which can be used by institutions eager to create high quality online learning offerings. The study, conducted by the Institute for Higher Education Policy, surveyed six institutions that are widely viewed as leading Distance Education providers, with the goal of identifying reliable information about what contributes to quality instruction. The result of these efforts was the list of twenty-four benchmarks which include student interaction with instructors and other students, fail-safe computer systems, and appropriate support for both faculty members and for students. “Many of the benchmarks will sound like common sense,” said Bob Chase, President of the National education Association, “because they are.” (10) Categories of benchmarks include

• Institutional support benchmarks
• Course development benchmarks
• Teaching/learning benchmarks
• Course structure benchmarks
• Student support benchmarks
• Faculty support benchmarks

• Evaluation and Assessment benchmarks

In all, the total collection of benchmarks are, as Mr. Chase remarked, common sense.

Adding to the guidance of institutions interested in developing online learning programs is a new web site which provides advice on teaching with technology. (11) This is a sort of “how-to” guide for building virtual classrooms and was developed by the University of Maryland in the United States although it is designed to be used by instructors anywhere. Creators of the site say that they want to encourage instructors to design their online courses with teaching objectives in mind, rather than technical wizardry.

To be sure, Distance Education is a topic of intense interest everywhere in the world and much is being learned about its implementation. In March of 2000, The Thai Office of Civil Service Commission officially recognized a master’s degree earned by a Thai student from the National Technological University in Fort Collins, Colorado, in the United States. (12) Also, two states in the United States, Tennessee and South Dakota have announced plans, already underway, to build statewide virtual universities. (13)

It is abundantly clear that Distance Education is well underway everywhere and that it will continue to be a topic of discussion and experimentation. It would benefit anyone interested in pursuing and supporting the increasing use of technology for providing education to students regardless of location to examine some of the various references cited in this brief review.

Notes

1. http://www.rohan.sdsu.edu/dept/senate/sendoc/distanceed.apr2000.html
2. Dale Carnevale, “San Diego State’s Senate created a detailed policy for distance courses.”

http://chronicle.com/free/2000/04/2000042601u.htm

3. ibid.
4. Jeffrey R. Young, “David Noble’s battle to defend the ‘Sacred Space’ of the classroom.”

http://chronicle.com/free/v46/i30/30a00101.htm

5. Sarah Carr, “Two professors find that online chats are unpopular.”

http://chronicle.com/free/2000/04/200004701u.htm

6. Sarah Carr, “After half a course, a professor concedes distance education is not for him.”

http://chronicle.com/free/2000/03/2000032801u.htm

7. “2 professors and student offer mixed views of distance education.”

http://chronicle.com/free/v45/i49/49a02702.htm

8. “A university president bemoans roadblocks to the growth of distance education.

http://chronicle.com/free/2000/04/2000041101u.htm

9. Florence Olsen, “Mellon Foundation hires Princeton’s Ira Fuchs for a new technology post.”

http://chronicle.com/free2000/04/2000041701u.htm

10. Dan Carnevale, “Survey produces a list of ‘benchmarks’ for quality distance programs.”

http://chronicle.com/free/2000/03/2000032201u.htm

11. Jeffrey R. Young, “Web site provides advice on teaching with technology.”

http://whronicle.com/free/2000/04/2000040501u.htm

12. Tony Gillotte, “Distance education gets official O.K. in Thailand.”

http://chronicle.com/free/2000/04/20000401u.htm

13. Jeffrey R. Young, “Citing benefits, 2 more states plan virtual universities.”