|
BOOK REVIEW
Gibson, C., editor. (1998). Distance learners in higher education:
Institutional responses for quality outcomes. Madison WI: Atwood Publishing,
ISBN: 1-891859-22-6. (paperback), 156 pp.
by Patricia Deubel, April 1999.
Distance education and training are growing rapidly in higher education and
are predicted to converge with campus modes of learning. Compounding the issues
of institutional concerns for cost effectiveness, the demand for bridging a
distance, and a technology that is not fully fit to meet the goals and needs of
distance education (Laurillard, Preece, Shneiderman, Neal, & Waern, 1998;
Turoff, 1998), there is the more important question, will the distance learner
succeed? This is the key question posed by Chère Campbell Gibson in her opening
editorial notes for Distance Learners in Higher Education, the first book
in the Atwood Publishing Diversity Series.
Gibson has gathered eight thought-provoking articles on current research and
practices regarding what is known about distance learners in higher education
and what is known about helping those persons to learn. All contributing authors
are engaged in conceptualizing and shaping North American distance education,
according to Michael Moore, founder and editor of The American Journal of
Distance Education. All hold doctoral degrees and include: Terry Anderson,
Meg Benke, Elizabeth Burge, Randy Garrison, Chère Campbell Gibson, Daniel
Granger, Charlotte Gunawardena, Christine Olgren, Irene Sanchez, and Melody
Thompson. Moore, who wrote the introduction, provided the rationale for a book
of this nature. He asks why post secondary educators have so generally failed to
study learners with the same devotion in which they have studied the information
they expect their students to study. Distance Learners in Higher Education
is an outgrowth of that concern to study learners.
Each article addresses a specific facet of distance learners. Much of what is
written also pertains to learners in traditional settings. The nature of
distance learners in higher education, gender, understanding and supporting
culturally diverse distance learners, distance learners' academic self-concept,
and the effects of learning strategies and motivation for improving learning
outcomes are discussed. Also included are discussions of the changing roles and
responsibilities for learning in a networked world and the need for supporting
learners at a distance from inquiry to completion. From beginning to end, the
authors seem to convey the message that distance educators need to be
learner-centered reflective practitioners.
The articles do not have to be read in any particular order. Recognizing that
a single text cannot provide all the answers, Gibson has included a list of some
of her favorite books, journals, newsletters, and web sites for readers who
would like to know more. The most recent book is dated 1996.
The content of Distance Learners in Higher Education has the potential
to significantly impact an audience far wider than that suggested by the title.
For example, the authors put forth several best practices: distance
educators need to know learners; provide orientations at several levels; design
for differences in learning styles with variety, active engagement, and choice;
evaluate authentically; and provide an integrated system of support. These
themes echo concerns of educators in any setting at all levels, not just those
who are presently involved or preparing to enter the area of distance learning
in higher education. Sherry (1996), who addresses many of the issues presented
in this book, says that traditionally distance learners have been thought of as
being adults, but the adult learner tradition is now changing. New programs,
such as the U.S. Federal government's Star Schools Program, have come into
existence to serve the K-12 population. As distance education becomes
commercialized (Turoff, 1998), learners themselves will need to be intelligent
consumers regarding the issues involved with learning via a different medium.
Three chapters deserve further comment regarding the perspectives taken by the
authors.
Olgren writes of the importance for distance educators to understand how
learning occurs and to know the factors which influence the learning process.
This best practice suggests that distance educators need to look more
closely at their use of behavioral and cognitive approaches to instructional
design. The content in her article does not specifically address distance
learning, rather all learning. Readers might be concerned, however, about the
appropriateness of the content presented in Olgren's discussion because 30 of
the 42 references used to write the article are dated prior to 1990. The latest
date is 1993.
The discussion presented is relevant, however, and supported by more recent
literature. Olgren's perspective is drawn from learning strategy research in
cognitive psychology, but she does acknowledge the role that behaviorism has
played in instructional design. For example, Hannafin, Hannafin, Hooper, Rieber,
and Kini (1996) agree that contemporary approaches to computer-based learning
are more often rooted in cognitive learning theories. Phillips and Soltis (1998)
discuss a variety of learning theories from classical to contemporary and
believe that each is useful depending on context. Like Olgren, their treatment
includes a discussion of psychological constructivism, the social aspects of
learning, situated cognition, and cognitive structures. They conclude that the
cognitive science approach is the emerging theory of learning from the
technology revolution, which also supports Olgren's perspective.
Olgren states that most learning strategy theory is based on a constructivist
perspective, but the literature leads practitioners to reflect on that
statement. For example, Sfard (1998) says that there is danger in choosing just
one metaphor for learning because dictatorship of a single metaphor, like a
dictatorship of a single ideology, may lead to theories that serve the interests
of certain groups to the disadvantage of others. She has identified two
metaphors for learning: acquisition and participation. Constructivism relies on
the participation metaphor; skill building, for example, requires an acquisition
metaphor. Current research on learning seems to be in a conceptual upheaval with
no prospects for equilibrium in sight. The idea that new knowledge germinates in
old knowledge has been promoted by all the theoreticians of intellectual
development, from Piaget to Vygotsky to contemporary cognitive scientists.
The chapter on gender issues in distance education by Burge leaves readers
with a distinct impression of a feminist viewpoint because the chapter stresses
concerns of women involved with technology. About half of the references used to
write this well-documented article refer to women in some way. Not one
specifically addresses the male perspective. There is a bias against men that
comes forth as Burge expresses alienation when discussion agendas and
applications of new technologies are set by others. She says that what is
considered to be good, usually expressed by men, is assumed to be good for her.
Readers might speculate that Burge's perspective has much to do with
statistics that she presents, which indicate that more women than men are
distance learners and gendering of course choices is evident. More importantly,
Burge indicates that she and many of her female students have experienced the
pressures of new technology and assumptions about its use. Burge's message is
that women must work harder to overcome psychological and participation barriers
to their education, often stereotyped assumptions about their capabilities to
deal with technology, and curriculum designs that may not fit their needs.
Constructivist, women-friendly, and technology guidelines for effective practice
are presented.
This chapter is particularly relevant for distance educators and learners
because distance education has the potential to link learners from both
developed and developing countries, where oftentimes there are different
cultural viewpoints regarding the appropriate roles and expectations of
women (Evans, 1995). Evans (1995), who is referenced in this article, believes
that distance education failure is likely to occur when western models are
adopted without adaptation to acculturized behaviors of teachers and
learners. If educators are not able to design instruction to accommodate
different perspectives on gender, women might be excluded from participation in
the technical and industrial development of some parts of the world. This
chapter lacks that balanced perspective regarding gender.
Granger and Benke wrote the closing chapter, Supporting Learners at a
Distance from Inquiry to Completion, from a business and marketing
perspective. Martin (1998) also addresses the implementation issues of
readiness, which are introduced in this chapter: the competency of incoming
learners, technological system readiness, institutional support readiness, and
faculty support readiness. However, Granger and Benke's discussion is limited
and does not reveal the darkside of the forces involved in an
implementation of distance learning (Turoff, 1998).
The chapter is the least referenced (four sources), but the authors do point
readers to the University of Wisconsin's module Learner Support Services
for additional information. Strategies and support mechanisms of great value
that institutions could consider to ensure success for learners, educators, and
institutions are included. Granger and Benke emphasize that assumptions and
inclinations of faculty and staff and the institutional infrastructure must be
reckoned with, but do not expand upon what those views might be.
Their highly relevant concern was addressed in a recent interview with Educom
Review (Rickard, 1999), at which William Graves, president of the
Collegis Research Institute and founder of the Institute for Academic
Technology, spoke about the nature of faculty resistance toward technology use
in education. Graves indicated that faculty resistance is changing from fear to
a lack of faith that institutions are supporting faculty in their efforts to
transform learning through information technology. At that same interview, Diana
Eck of Harvard University expressed concern that technology is changing so fast
that institutions fear it will be outdated by the time it is installed.
In concluding remarks about distance learning Gibson poses the question,
"Does it mean we can no longer do business as usual?" She answers,
"Maybe and maybe not." Martin (1997) believes each institution must
answer for itself, but by failing to join the distance education game,
institutions may well feel the financial ramifications in the not too distant
future. Visionaries as Don Tapscott and Peter Drucker firmly believe that many
universities and colleges are doomed if they do not reinvent themselves in
regard to their delivery system and relationship with the private sector. It is
guaranteed that the status quo will not survive (Tapscott, 1998). With those
thoughts in mind, this book becomes a must read. In fact, the situational,
philosophical, psychological, pedagogical, technical, social and cultural issues
introduced in this book may influence reflective practitioners to read Distance
Learners in Higher Education more than once.
REFERENCES
Evans, K. (1995). Barriers to participation of women in technological
education and the role of distance education. Vancouver, BC: The
Commonwealth of Learning.
http://www.col.org/colweb/site/pid/3343 Accessed July 23,
2007[Note: URL updated since publication of the article.]
Hannafin, M., Hannafin, K., Hooper, S., Rieber, L., & Kini, A.
(1996). Research and research with emerging technologies. In D.H. Jonassen
(Ed.), Handbook for Research for Educational Communications and
Technology (pp. 378-402). New York: Simon & Schuster Macmillan.
Laurillard, D., Preece, J., Shneiderman, B., Neal, L., & Waern, Y.
(1998). Distance learning: Is it the end of education as most of us know it?
In Proceedings of the CHI '98 Summary Conference on CHI '98 Summary:
Human Factors in Computing Systems, 86-87.
Martin, J. (1997). Are we ready for distance education? In SIGUCCS '97
Proceedings of the 25th SIGUCCS Conference on User Services: Are
You Ready?, 229-232.
Martin, R. R. (1998). Key issues in transitioning from distance education
to distributed learning. Online Chronicle of Distance Education, 12(1),
Spring. http://www.fcae.nova.edu/disted/spring98/martin.html Accessed
March 9, 1999. [Link is no longer available.]
Phillips, D. C., & Soltis, J. F. (1998). Perspectives on Learning,
3rd Ed. New York: Teachers College Press. ISBN:
0-8077-3703-8.
Rikard, W. (1999). Technology, education, and the changing nature of
resistance. Educom Review, 34(1), 42-45.
http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/html/erm/erm99/erm9915.html Accessed March 12, 1999.
[URL updated on July 23, 2007].
Sfard, A. (1998). On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of
choosing just one. Educational Researcher, 27(2), 4-13.
Sherry, L. (1996). Issues in distance learning. International Journal
of Educational Telecommunications, 1(4), 337-365.
http://carbon.cudenver.edu/~lsherry/pubs/issues.html Updated June 10,
2001.
Email: lsherry@carbon.cudenver.edu [URL
updated on last access, July 23, 2007.]
Tapscott, D. (1998). Growing up digital: The rise of the Net
Generation. New York: McGraw-Hill. ISBN: 0-07-063361-4.
Turoff, M. (1998). Alternative futures for distance learning: The force
and the darkside. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration.
http://www.westga.edu/~distance/turoff11.html
Accessed March 11, 1999.
Email: murray@vc.njit.edu [Last
access July 23, 2007.]
Contributor:
Patricia Deubel has a Ph. D. in Computing Technology in Education from the
School of Computer and Information Sciences at Nova Southeastern University. She
has over 25 years teaching experience in mathematics and computer
education. Email: deubelp@neo.rr.com
Back to top
|
|
