Module 5 : Economics of student support
A special treat for this module was being able to have conversation with Dr. Tony Bates, a world renowned expert and author in the field of distance education.
I had the following discussion with Bates, In part I, Using technology to improve the cost-effectiveness of the academy, you make an interesting statement about learners being taught in large lecture courses. Thus, individual learners can potentially get lost in the masses as there is no one-on-one attention. Consequently, students would assume the responsibility of much of their own learning through self-study and lecture notes. In your opinion, isn't this the same as some e-learning courses where the instructor is a facilitator and guide? In knowing this, I would think that new technology would open a lot more avenues to scaffold learning. His response was indeed interesting as he stated: “The main difference I see between independent learning resulting from large lecture classes and independent learning though e-learning is that at least in well designed distance programs, the 'scaffolding' and instructor support is deliberately built in. This is not a function though of the technology. Large lecture classes could include more attempts by the instructor to build in support, and some do this, through online discussion forums, small face-to-face group activities, guided activities posted on the course web site. The problem is, as the recent Campus Computing Project survey shows, more and more institutions are making training mandatory for online teaching, but not for face-to-face teaching.”
Another question for Bates: In part 2, Using technology to improve the cost-effectiveness of the academy, you use the phrase, "knowledge referee." I have never heard this term before but it definitely fits as the instructor(s) absolutely do control the flow of information. On another note, what do you think of Facebook as a learning tool? Bates wrote: “Please don't start me on 'Facebook.' I have very strong and personal negative feelings about Facebook. I don't want my personal information under the control of people with no emotional intelligence and even fewer scruples. I have deactivated my account (twice) for privacy reasons. It is though increasingly difficult not to use Facebook, because everyone else uses it. I am particularly concerned that Facebook will become the default for e-mail. Instead I use LinkedIn, which is a professional social network, but I suspect it will be only a matter of time before it becomes bought by Facebook or possibly Google. There are though some interesting applications of Facebook in the educational field. Take a look at Supercool school. This a a Facebook application, putting people who want to learn about something with those willing to teach about it. It has been picked up by Google Inc., who are using a firewall protected version for internal training. Now if your question was 'What do I think of social media as a learning tool?" my response would have been much more positive. I think that social media are excellent for informal learning and learner-generated content. Informal learning, i.e. learning that does not lead to any qualification and learning that is embedded in everyday life, is becoming an important part of formal learning, too. This is the kind of learning that happened over coffee or in a bar, and now happens increasingly over the Internet. In formal courses, we need to make better use of informal learning, as well, encouraging learners to create their own content and discuss it with friends and other students as well as with the instructor, even if it is not directly tied to assessment. Also, with respect to the topic for this course, costs are relatively low compared with, say, using a learning management system such as WebTycho, Blackboard or Moodle (and usually social media are much easier to use). The main concern is privacy again, because you don't know where the servers are, or what access the owners have to data, whereas an LMS is under the control of an educational institution.” As you can see by his reaction, that Face Book, is at times, not all that it is bragged up to be. This is comforting to know as I have yet to see the educational value of this supposed learning tool
This module focused on more readings from Bates (2005) text, Technology, E-learning and Distance education.
Chapter 7 - Web-based learning: access and teaching issues. This chapter was an interesting read some several aspects. It spoke how quickly the WWW has taken the country by storm - approximate inception was 1995. There are, of course, continued issues in making the WWW global such as bandwidth, low levels of literacy, remote area, unreliable electricity, low income and such. All in all, Bates feels that the digital divide is narrowing and that "post secondary teachers underestimate public access to Internet technologies, based on their own generally slow adoption of entertainment technologies" (p. 131). How true, yet in my area in western Maryland many still have dial-up connections. Bates (2005) introduced me to Silicon Chalk which allow student with wireless personal computers to download materials from write boards (p. 133).
On another note, Bates (2005) sees the relevance of web-based learning and indicates that online teaching does not need to be exclusive, thus a completely online classroom. Instead, it can be used to supplement learning in a controlled environment, yet maintenance and management can become burdensome. Off the beaten path - online courses are great when the weather is bad and the power stays on. Bates (2005) makes clear there is a rationale for online learning as it allows for "self-assessment, multiple choice testing, and continuing revision, thus providing students more opportunities for self-study than in a traditional classroom" (p. 139). However, the point is also made that the aforementioned are not new concepts to learning, particularly in the classroom. There are modes in the f2f classroom that allow for role learning, comprehension, knowledge construction, critical thinking, problem-based learning and collaborative learning. On that note, I suppose it is important to note that do matter how well designed e-learning is, if a learner is lazy and has little desire to learn, all is a waste. Bates (2005) makes the convincing statement, "It is more difficult though to identify unique educational characteristics of online learning that cannot also be found in face-to-face teaching" (p. 147).Also, Bates (2005) proclaims, "constructivist approaches to teaching existed long before the internet" (p. 152).
Chapter 8 - Web-based learning: costs and organizational issues
An interesting quote from the start, “Currently in higher education … we individualize faculty practice … and standardize the learning experience … Instead, we need to do the opposite: individualize student learning and standardize faculty practice … What higher education needs is greater consistency in academic practice that builds on accumulated knowledge about improving quality and reducing costs” (Bates, 2005, p. 153). How true as students need to be treated as individuals as we educate them. I reflect back on Bates (2005) as he noted in an earlier chapter that web-based learning had the propensity to engage learners to achieve their academic goal through creative and critical thinking skills as they use knowledge construction, problem solving and collaborative learning (p. 152). Yet something else that is important to make online learning work is the collaborative effort from all involved such as marketing, advising, student services, etc.
The bulk of this chapter spoke on cost, costs, and more costs. Bates (2005) brought many items to light when considering offering web-based learning such as developing a business plan and who will fund the project. As he speaks of the budget, he brought out a lot of parameters that need to be addressed in the budget such as revenues, expenditures, planning and management, course development and maintenance, delivery, and overheads. This chapter really made my head spin as I quickly realized that putting a web course together is not a mere overnight process. Instead, it means intense study and consideration prior to moving forward. Bates (2005) states is most fittingly as he comments, “The greatest challenge for institution moving to web-based learning is to find appropriate organizational models that ensure quality while controlling cost (p. 164). As Bates (2005) discusses models of course development, my institution like many others fit into the lone ranger model (p. 164), noting the issues of quality, workload and scalability; essentially a balance of ensuring quality while controlling cost. It is apparently clear to me that design drives both costs and effectiveness.
Finally, Bates (2005) asks an interesting question, “Do teachers have the right, in the name of academic freedom, to inflict poor teaching on students when we know there are better ways to teach (p. 172)? This is a loaded question, yet I do think there is a great need for mandatory training in the online world.
Chapter 9 - Audio-, video- and Web-conferencing; access and teaching issues
This chapter brought to the forefront that using audio, video and web conferencing is much dependent on computer processing speeds and compression technology. Despite these real issues there appears to be a growing interest among educators to use this technology for synchronous learning. I think the highlight of this chapter was Bates (2005) stating the importance of video in conferencing (p. 185). In particular, the following:
· 84% of participants indicated that video improved the quality of communication between; without video, the quality of discussion was felt to be inferior.
· Video was particularly valuable in interrupting pauses in conversation; without video there was some anxiety and confusion.
· The University of Michigan study found that video had a strong effect on the satisfaction of the group members and appeared to motivate individuals to work together.
· Sun Microsystems found that without video, collaboration declined among users.
· Collaborating with high quality video was perceived to be as good as f2f.
· When video was added to support remote collaboration, the number of email messages drooped; when video was removed, although the collaborative tools were still available, the number of email messages per day doubled.
Thus, I can glean that verbal communication is much enhanced with video. Yet, on the other hand, there are some individuals that do not like being the star on camera, creating anxiety and consequently decreased involvement and participation. As I reflect on my past experience with two-way conferencing, one issue can bothered me was the interference of noise such as chairs sliding, people coughing, papers shuffling and such.
Chapter 10 - Audio-, video- and Web-conferencing; costs and organizational issues
This chapter continued on with costs. In particular, Bates (2005) brings forth the question who pays for this interaction, the student or the institution. This is interesting to me as my narrow thinking lead me to believe that this was what we pay tuition and fees for. Obviously I was wrong as potentially these costs could be added on to the student’s bill. Also included in this chapter are the main drivers of synchronous communication such as prep time, choice of technology, phone line charges, hardware, software, materials, etc. As with each chapter Bates (2005) proposes some interesting thoughts. “According to Downes (20020, the main problem with current online learning is its monolithic appearance and format, which replicates earlier forms of distance education. The overemphasis of text has more to do with publishing than instruction. Although the overemphasis of web publishing is easily avoided with good design, asynchronous web-based technology benefits only a segment of potential learners, namely those who are less text-literate suffer. Furthermore, not all learners have the experience or discipline to learn independently, and this is inherent in an asynchronous mode” (p. 209). How true, as educators are at times, quick to get things online, forgetting the fact that learners are diverse in their strengths and weaknesses.
Bates, A. W. (2005). Technology, e-learning and distance education . London New York : Routledge. Chapters 7-10.
Bates, A. W. (2009, October 10th). Using technology to improve the cost-effectiveness of the academy: Part 1 - 3. In A. W. Bates (Ed.), E-learning and distance education resources .
Also in this mode we read the following articles:
Curran, C. (2008). Online learning and the university. In W. J. Bramble, Panda, S (Ed.), Economics of distance and online learning (pp. 26-51). London: Kogan Page..
Rumble, G. (2004). The costs and costing of networked learning. In G. Rumble (Ed.), Papers and debates on the costs and economics of distance education and online learning (pp. 139-162). Oldenburg: Bibliotheks- und Informationssystem der Carl von Ossietzky Universität Oldenburg.
Rumble, G. (2004). E-Education: Whose Benefits, whose costs? [2001]. In G. Rumble (Ed.), Papers and debates on the costs and economics of distance education and online learning (Vol. 7, pp. 119-138). Oldenburg: Bibliotheks- und Informationssystem der Carl von Ossietzky Universität Oldenburg.
Zane Berge, & Donaldson, C. (2008). Cost-benefit of online learning. In W. J. Bramble, Panda, S. (Ed.), Economics of distance and online learning (pp. 179-194). London : Kogan Page
