Ken Eustace, Joseph Meloche and James Henri

Ken Eustace

Lecturer in Information Technology

Charles Sturt University

Locked Bag 675

Wagga Wagga NSW 2678

Phone: 02 6933 2832 Fax: 02 6933 2733

e-mail: keustace@csu.edu.au

Joseph A Meloche

Lecturer

Department of Economics and Information Systems

University of Wollongong

e-mail: jmeloche@uow.edu.au

James Henri

Deputy Director

Centre for Information Technology in Education

Faculty of Education

The University of Hong Kong

Hong Kong

Phone: (852)28592849 Fax: (852)25177194

e-mail: james@cite.hku.hk

The use of tele-learning environments for professional education and in particular the importance of communication with, and amongst students and giving students responsibility for their own education, is discussed. The authors experiences and expectations with tele-learning at one of Australia’s largest distance education providers, Charles Sturt University are presented including results of research into the educational value of student use of an online forum, are discussed in this context ,as a curriculum model for continuous learning by distance education for information professionals is put forward.

Delivery is the wrong metaphor for tele-learning as the term ‘delivery’ unleashes a sense of instructor control and learner passivity. Course delivery is not the same as education. In fact the best online learning occurs when the learner is at the centre of the instructional model. This paper suggests that the great value of online delivery is that it has the potential to shift the focus from the instructor to the student. It therefore can provide a tailored to-the-minute learning environment as teacher and learner are no longer roles but functions of professional peers.

While distance education in Australia is innovative and more flexible than face-to-face teaching, it still involves the physical distribution of printed materials and occasional attendance by students at residential schools. This model has lead to top down communication with little reason for cross communication to occur amongst students. Convenient advances in communication, fortunately, have supplemented this practice with information technologies such as e-mail, forums and web based resources and other forms of online communication. The question as to whether increased communication needs are yet not being met still needs as of to be addressed.

Receiving information in a variety of modes, whether online or physical, has the potential to increase difficulties in organisation, authority, and receipt acknowledgment with there being no single standard or integration protocol available. Further the increase in available types of communication and ranges of resources does not of itself mean that increased communication is occurring. Post-Secondary education in Australia has been affected by changes in government policy, and changes in the way that government provides support to the higher education sector. The Higher Education Report for 1999 to 2001 (Kemp 1999) identified that graduates should have the following thinking and knowledge skills [Figure 1]:

Figure 1. Knowledge and thinking skills from The Higher Education Report (Kemp 1999).

http://www.detya.gov.au/highered/he_report/1999_2001/default.htm

Students in Australia are currently faced with an over abundance of information and the onus is now on the students to be able to critically assess the worth of that information. Students, like academics, now face the receipt of material from a variety of modes, e-mail, websites, physical mail, phone, fax etc., and even combinations of modes with computer based answering machines and faxes. This is particularly so in the case of distance education students.

What has yet to fully change though is teaching practice. The problems for academics can include increasing difficulty in keeping material up-to-date and problems in flexibility. For example the more preparation that goes into material content and design can also mean a decrease in the use of current examples or the examination of topical issues, that present themselves. This lack of flexibility also imposes problems for relevance, currency and the inclusion of timely or local content.

While various solutions, such as tightening up the publishing time frame, and constant review of material, provide some relief, these measures do not address the main problem. The main problem is the belief or conviction that all the material that needs to be used can either be provided or identified in advance by the academic. As long as this belief is maintained it can only lead to increases in the volume of material supplied. The academic must, if following a mode that attempts to provide all things for the entire range of people studying the subject, increase the volume and scope of material to be supplied. This approach cannot succeed (Meloche, 2000).

Over the years, the size of notes has diminished, as instructors have been able to set Australian textbooks; sometimes the instructor is the author. Likewise the number and style of assessment has changed. There are fewer assessment tasks and some tasks are designed to monitor what the student is learning rather than what the student knows. Communication to students was enhanced by way of group feedback sheets and the introduction of a course newsletter, which provided an updating service to students.

What can be achieved are approaches that engage the student in the process of their learning and give increased responsibility to the students for provision of material that relates to the area of the subject that they (the students) wish to cover. If students are given this role and responsibility, it is essential that they proceed in a manner that allows for increases and flexible communication between the students and with the academic. The selection and evaluation of the material then must form an integral part of the study and assessment. When the onus is on the students to discuss and evaluate the material that is located, selected and used, increased learning will occur.

Since 1982 subjects have been offered by Riverina College of Advanced Education, now part of Charles Sturt University (CSU), in the distance education, part-time mode, for working information professionals. (Henri 1983, 1987) At that time a subject consisted of what was known as ‘a mail package’. A mail package consisted of a subject outline, a booklet of notes, and a compilation of readings. Some mail packages also included a video or an audiocassette. The majority of subjects did not have a set textbook because there was a paucity of Australian material but students were referred to a wide range of reference sources. The ‘Notes’ section of a mail package tended to be large and included a range of self-assessment exercises and questions. The currency of material was always an issue because of lead times for timely production of printed materials and the economies associated with printing notes and readings for two or three cohorts.

Interaction between instructor and student was limited to a ‘residential school’ held on campus at Wagga Wagga a rural city, some 500 kilometres from Sydney and Melbourne, ‘phone conversations, mail, and assignment feedback. In this environment instructors tended to over assess students.

Over the past five or so years CSU has moved from a print-based approach to distance education to a combination of print and online offerings. Not only must they have it to be admitted into the courses; they must use a range of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) to successfully complete the course requirements.

To take advantage of this migration, all the courses in the School of Information Studies require that students have online access. ICT tools include a web based forum (and where appropriate sub-forums), listservs, and access to all CSU facilities including the full range of library services. Some subjects include chat or MOO. In the online environment a subject is no longer a discreet entity as it was in the days of the mail package.

A subject or course can be an integrated whole consisting of a number of parts that may include: a textbook and a set of readings either provided in print or electronically; a crafted set of notes written around the textbook and readings. Electronic interaction with the instructor and peers using asynchronous tools, such as, a forum, listserv, and synchronous tools such as a chat room or MOO. Continuous assessment of learning (either individual or by pairs) where peers are able to comment on progress and provide advice; a set of URLs or a requirement to evaluate pertinent and current material. Some subjects include optional face to face sessions.

One approach that changes the focus from teaching to learning is to put questions to the students rather than to provide answers. In this way students can be guided in the direction but will still be called upon to access their (collective) knowledge of a subject and to begin to address the study or research that they need to undertake. Asking questions has a number of advantages and this can include using the questions to inform the students of the direction or orientation the academic wishes to focus on or to give students, through the provision of questions, an indication of the level or depth of work required. The practice of having students also ask question of themselves and each other, of their existing knowledge and experience, of what they still need to know, of how they might proceed, and how they will know when they have sufficient knowledge is important.

Students can interact with their instructor entirely by electronic means if they so desire, and some forms of electronic communication are required in each subject. This means that students have to learn to deal with a number of applications software, clients, search engines and browsers. The use of ICTs is embedded into the fabric of each subject as described by Rochester and Eustace (1997).

Subject assessment varies from year to year and subject by subject with the intention that each student will be ‘tested’ and ‘measured’ in a variety of ways. "Participation’ in the online world is important and most subjects therefore provide assessment ‘marks’ for participation in one way or another.

In 1982 the rigour and currency of a subject could be measured against the quality of the mail package and the textbook. In this environment the instructor was the expert and the student was expected to respond to the expert. In 2000 instructors are much more like ‘guides on the side’ and the quality of a subject is measured against its propensity to provide a stimulus to student thinking and creativity.

The arrival of the twenty first century provides the possibility of a sense of community not possible in earlier times, where authoritative learning was in vogue. Recent times have seen a shift:

"...as educational methodologies focus more on collaborative learning, it is [now] essential that the dynamics of group work are understood".

(Burdett, 1998).

http://www.cegsa.sa.edu.au/acec98/papers/p_burdett.html

In times past the only sense of community was the Residential School; an intense ‘on campus’ teaching session of two to four days. Students and instructors did get to know each other a little but the links would tend to loosen as everyone returned to their normal ways of doing things.

The networked world allows the possibility of community but few instructors actually achieve it. Our experience suggests that such interaction must be encouraged and rewarded. Likewise over zealous interaction must be controlled just as it would be in a regular classroom. Students must be encouraged to understand that they should attend to the needs of others as much as to their own needs. That means answering as well as asking questions. The use of appropriate keywords in subject lines and posting succinct messages are also important lessons to be learned.

An instructor who overplays his/her hand is likely to stifle debate, whereas less ‘interference’ creates a climate in which risks can be taken. Students can be rewarded for helping their peers and this creates a good climate of willingness to share resources. This can be formalised by establishing group or partnership tasks and assessment items. In this way subjects can better mirror the conditions of the real world and of the subject content. For example a subject about leadership would provide a good vehicle for creating teamwork assignments.

In the 1980s it was rare to find that students were creating local study groups. Perhaps surprisingly, the online world has spawned the desirability of collegiality. Often collaboration commences when a student begins to exchange private e-mail with selected peers. This may lead to a group of students arranging meetings in a chat room. Meeting in a chat room may lead to some students deciding to meet face to face. If this sense of community can be engendered within the initial subjects it is likely to become automatic.

When considering the power of MOO for continuing professional development, it is worthwhile to examine some completed case studies, such as the numerous trials and research conducted at Charles Sturt University, Australia largest provider of distance education. Using the enCore Xpress system developed by Haynes and Holmevik (2000), Learning Communities MOO, or LC_MOO (Multi User Domain, Object-oriented), was established by teachers and researchers, as the synchronous tool used to schedule meetings, hold classes, seminars and develop collaborations with others (http://ispg.csu.edu.au:8800). Many online educators find that the best class sessions are interactive, where discussion is preferred over the lecture, however it may be that lecture still co-exists with more prominent interaction and discussion as a teaching partner.

Online community building occurs in a regular way, but time must be allowed for members to learn about the ICT platform used. Participants act as peers to support knowledge building and sharing of concepts, artefacts and experiences throughout the group. An essential part of the model allows time for the group to develop, in three main stages of growth. It is important to nurture the group through three stages of growth: socialisation, alliance building and forming groups (projects). If the clearly defined three stages of growth for group learning are observed, then participants may quickly learn to master the educational technology framework, which is now part of the learning that is to occur. It is hoped that further collection and analysis of data in this area, may reveal that the role of teaching staff evolving as active participants and facilitators of group harmony and confidence.

Over time (e.g. 6-10 weeks), a sense of community and knowledge building in continuing professional development is expressed in shared and private workspaces - the key components of a community building environment for CPE includes knowledge construction, electronic publishing, generation of Group discussion transcripts (recorded from MOO sessions and chat rooms) and a learning artefacts archive for current and future practitioners.

Learning artefacts, archiving, analysis and evaluation are key components of the knowledge building model. The survival of the community depends on all participants acting as peers and passing the baton back and forth for effective group work and work flow. It can be applied to most learning situations where group projects and knowledge construction are part of the strategy in continuing professional development online courses, indeed all education today, using the Internet. The ZOPE site called ISPG Zworld (http://ispg.csu.edu.au) has a collection of published artefacts by students across many diverse subjects, co-existing as part of a greater online community. [See details at the ZOPE pages found at http://zope.org].

A community, in one sense, can be an outcome of cultural behaviour, built in a cumulative way. This means that today's class influences the class of tomorrow. Many cultures only exist, after time, as a collection of artefacts - material that was made, modified, used or transported, by past human behaviour. The community and knowledge building models used in a MOO or ZOPE environment, are based on this cultural schema (Eustace and Hay, 2000). As a result, publications by participants become an artefact of their cultural behaviour in the class. This is related to community building and knowledge sharing within a workgroup context, where team members make responsible actions as managers, or curators of an organisation’s knowledge artefacts.

ICT tools such as MOO has helped to re-define the lecturer-student roles and relationship behaviours, in a manner consistent with both the libertarianist philosophy of Nozick (1974) and the alternative education schema, proposed at Adjacent Schools (2000). The Adjacent Schools network (http://www.adjacentschools.net) has been a regular MOO user in its online learning programs since 1995. Adjacent Schools members have a message for those seeking and developing continuing professional development in the online environment:

"Adjacent Schools is a network of colleagues and learning organizations connected throughout the world devoted to shedding light on our common responsibilities in life. We believe conscious examination of who we are, who we talk to, what we talk about, and how we talk about it, matters."

 

Elsewhere tele-learning tools like the TeleTOP development at http://www.teletop.nl (Collis, 2002), reveals a convergence of ideas where the teachers provide the tele-learning environment and students build content and take responsibility for learning under the 4E model. Further, Nolan & Weiss (2002) suggest, that in order to understand how each online course is a learning community, then knowing the history and descriptive features will allow educators to determine the various learning interactions that are needed for success.

The more an instructor knows about the learner the better s/he is able to tailor the learning agenda and the process of learning to each individual student. Instructors in the online environment must create an appropriate cognitive and affective environment through which it is possible to get to ‘unpack’ students and their learning. Certainly an instructor wants to know what the student is learning not what the student already knew.

The creation of a learning community is an important beginning. But it is just a beginning. Instructors must devise assessment that identifies the learning that has transpired and rewards the insightful recording of that learning. The more we show interest in learning processes, the more marks we give to it, the greater the learner will give process his or her attention!

Creating assessment tasks that provide the opportunity for instructor intervention is helpful. Many approaches can be taken but in the main they will be qualitative and authentic in form. The use of a portfolio is perhaps the simplest approach.

The learning community in an online environment is one characterised by discourse. Because this discourse is usually provided in a traceable form it can be subjected to content analysis which allows the instructor to see how discussion is unfolding. Student participation in its many forms can be analysed as: visits, posts, length of posts, timing of visits and posts and the relationship to critical dates (assessment etc).

The instructor can, for example, use content analysis (Henri, Dunn and Messing, 2000) to analyse the substance of the message, the relevance to the teaching/learning task and the initiation of the message. Henri and Messing (2000) used a coding schema that provided the feedback that a busy instructor needs to examine whether intentions are being met and if there is a need for intervention. The Henri and Messing model provides a good overview of the discourse but it is limited by the lack of precision in terms of text pieces. Henri and Messing chose the message as the text piece. This means that complex messages are equated with a single word message. Breaking messages into a number of text pieces is more accurate but also much more time consuming. Other models provide greater depth to the cognitive nature of the text piece. Perhaps the best known approach is that by France Henri (1992) in which she employs the following broad terms which are then broken into sub terms such as Participative, Social, Interactive, Cognitive and Metacognitive.

None of these models deals with the participation of lurkers: that is students who are accessing the discourse but not responding to it. Analysis of this element of the learning community is as important as an understanding of the silent contributors in a tutorial room. Analysis by Henri and Messing suggested that the ratio of accesses to messages was in the order of 4:1.

The following graph from Henri and Messing [Figure 2] provides just one example of the information that content analysis can provide. The horizontal axis represents the weeks of learning. The vertical axis represents the number of messages posted.

Figure 2. Distribution pattern for learning tasks assessment motivation

In this model, the content provided by the academic would be kept to a minimum. It would consist primarily of criteria for learning and assessment, an outline of the material to be covered and key questions that must be addressed in the study of the literature and the assessment tasks that the students would undertake.

The work of the academic, changes in form, from being the provider of the information or knowledge, to the more appropriate role of being the guide to information sources or even a critic of the available information. Similarly students should see themselves as investigators and critics, and active participants, not as mere passive recipients. By following this model, particularly in distance education, it is easy to see the advantages for increased flexibility in the provision of distance education.

What would increase is the communication that academic would have with and among students. There would be increased communication between students. This increased communication between students may be encouraged and directed in a number of ways, such as, providing group or project work or through prearranged meetings, virtual or otherwise. The increased contact with the academic and the willingness and commitment of the academic to be available for an increase in frequent intermittent contact is essential.

As mentioned earlier electronic communication resources, such as, e-mail, forums and net meetings and web resources, are now available to students and academics. These resources if used as a central part of the learning experience rather than as, an add-on, can be very beneficial and can be used to support collaborative and problem-based learning strategies.

In summary, it can be seen that any learning approach that is going to work for distance education, students will need to be up-front about the implications of it for learning and the responsibility that students need to take for their own learning. This can be achieved by academics making their assumptions explicit, by including, the students as partners in the process of their education. This "interaction" approach puts increased emphasis on interpersonal communication. This is a particularly important aspect of the proposed model for distance education and it in a sense takes the distance problem out the equation in that it places the responsibility for learning where it ultimately belongs, with the student. While this in no way diminishes the work or the responsibility of the academic it does change their role and the type of responsibility that they take in working with the students. Teaching and learning are no longer roles, as Eustace (2003) suggests, but functions that each can use, as associates together in an e-learning environment.

Furthermore it should be noted that most distance education students in Australia are employed adults, and what they achieve at university directly impacts on them as employees. When students achieve critical thinking and high level communication skills they are not only well positioned to continue their education well beyond their first degree, but also into the work environment. It is important to realise that employers welcome students/employees with these skills, as they will be able to challenge accepted practices and know how to approach problems and achieve change. It is through questioning and answering these self posed questions that effective change can and will occur.

Bundy A. (1999). Information Literacy: The 21st Century Educational Smartcard. Australian Academic & Research Libraries, 30(4), 233-250.

Burdett, P. (1998). The collaborative classroom: Lessons learned from the electronic meeting system, Proceedings of 15th Australian Computers in Education Conference, ACEC98, 1998. Online. Internet. [July 15, 2000]. Available at: http://www.cegsa.sa.edu.au/acec98/papers/p_burdett.html

Cahoon, B. (ed.) (1998). Adult Learning and the Internet. Vol. 78, in New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education. Jossey-Bass Publications. San Francisco. USA.

Collis, B. (2002). The TeleTOP initiative: New learning, new technology. Journal of Industrial and Commercial Training, 34 (6), 218-223.

Eustace, K. (2003). Educational value of e-learning in conventional and complementary computing education. Proceedings of 16 16th Annual Conference of the National Advisory Committee on Computing Qualifications, Palmerston North, New Zealand, 6th - 9th July 2003.

Eustace, K. and Hay, L. (2000). A community and knowledge building model in computer education. Proceedings of the Fourth Australasian Computing Education Conference, 4 - 6 December 2000. Monash University, Melbourne, Australia, 4 - 6 December, 2000.

 

GlobalNet Associates. (2000). Association of Adjacent Schools. Online. Internet. [March 15, 2001].

Available WWW: http://www.adjacentschools.net/

Haynes, C. and Holmevik, J. R. (2000). MOOniversity: A student’s guide to online learning environments. Allyn & Bacon: Needham Height, MA.

Henri, F. (1992). Computer conferencing and content analysis. In A. R. Kaye (Ed.), Collaborative learning through computer conferencing: The Najaden papers (pp. 115-136). New York: Springer.

Henri J. (1983) Education in library and information science by the external mode: a viewpoint. Australian College Libraries 1(1): 20-25.

Henri J. (1987) Distance education and school librarianship: an Australian experience. Emergency Librarian 15(2) : 32-33

Henri J. and Messing J. (2000) Teachers information skills: an analysis of teachers use of an electronic tool, the forum. Paper to be presented at information literacy: key to the future 29th Annual IASL Conference. Malmo, Sweden, 9 August.

Henri J, Dunn M. and Messing J. (2000) Convergence: Online teaching and learning - Roles for participants. Presentation to CELT forum on learning and teaching: convergence. Wagga Wagga: 4 July.

Kemp D. (1999). Higher Education Report for 1999 to 2001 Triennium. Canberra: DETYA.

Laurillard D. (1993). Rethinking University Teaching: a framework for the effective use of educational technology. London: Routledge.

Mayer R & Goodchild F. (1995). The Critical Thinker. Chicago: Brown & Benchmark.

Meloche J. (2000) The importance of critical thinking in distance education. Lifelong Learning Conference, Yeppoon, Queensland, Australia.

Meloche J. (1994a). Information Literacy the key to successful use of information technology. BISCIM' 94 Impact of Information Technology on Information Management (pp. 48-1). China: China Society for Scientific and Technical Information.

Meloche J. (1994b). Introductory CD ROM Searching: The Key To Effective ONDISC Searching. New York: Haworth Press.

Meloche J & Crawford K. (1998). A Metaphorical Approach to Information Seeking, a Q Study. 14th Annual Conference of the Internal Society for the Scientific Study of Subjectivity Seoul Korea.

Nardi B and O'Day V. (1999). Information Ecologies: Using Technology with Heart. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Nozick, R. (1974). Anarchy, state and Utopia. Oxford. Basil Blackwell.

Paul R. (1995). Critical Thinking: How to Prepare Students for a Rapidly Changing World. Santa Rosa CA: Foundation for Critical Thinking.

Ramsden P. (1988). Improving learning: New Perspectives. London: Kogan Page.

Ramsden P. (1992). Learning to Teach in Higher Education. London: Routledge. Author information sheet.

Rochester, M.K. and Eustace, K. (1997). A distance independent/open learning education model for Continuing Professional Education of Librarians. Human Development: Competencies for the Twenty-first Century, Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Continuing Professional Education, The Royal School of Librarianship, Copenhagen, Denmark, pp