Vol 7.6 DEOSNEWS

DEOSNEWS Vol. 7 No. 6, ISSN 1062-9416.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

EDITORIAL

Use of computer conferencing (CC) or computer-mediated

communication (CMC) as a medium for educational

delivery has expanded rapidly in the last decade. CC allows

learners and teachers to interact synchronously or

asynchronously via a computer network.

Effective educational use of this powerful

telecommunications medium requires attention to a

number of technological, organizational, design, and

instructional considerations. "Best Practices of Computer

Conferencing in Distance Education," a conference held at

The Pennsylvania State University February 25-26,

1996, provided a forum for the discussion of these issues,

as well as guides to CC development and practice for

participants.

The goals of the conference were to identify and highlight

the exemplary practices of institutions using computer

conferencing to deliver courses in higher education

contexts. Day One showcased the successful use of

computer-mediated instruction at four institutions:

Thomas A. Edison College, Rochester Institute of

Technology, The Open Learning Agency of Canada, and

Houston Community College System. Each institution

described its experiences with computer conferencing in

terms of administrative issues, course development,

faculty issues, and student support. These presentations

served as the basis for intensive discussions on Day Two,

during which representatives from each of the four

institutions moderated interactive sessions of participants

to discuss topics central to the use of computer

conferencing in distance education.

This issue of DEOSNEWS comprises the presentation by

Susan Rogers and Timothy Wells of Rochester Institute of

Technology. Later issues will offer those describing the

other institutions featured at the conference.

The complete conference report, "Best Practices of

Computer Conferencing in Distance Education," may be

purchased from the American Center for the Study of

Distance Education. This report includes three parts:

summaries of the presentations of each of the four "Best

Practices" institutions; overviews of conference discussion

sessions on topics related to administration, faculty and

instruction, instructional design, and student services; and

highlights of the conference schedule including names of

presenters, moderators, and student recorders of the

institutional presentation and topical discussion sessions.

For more information or to order, call the telephone number

listed above or visit our Web site ( http://www.cde.psu.edu/ACSDE/ ).

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

COMPUTER-MEDIATED COMMUNICATIONS:

ALTERNATIVE ENVIRONMENTS FOR LEARNING

Susan M. Rogers

WXXI Public Broadcasting Council

Rochester, NY 14614

susan_rogers@wxxi.pbs.org

(formerly of Rochester Institute of Technology)

Timothy Wells

Rochester Institute of Technology

Rochester, NY 14614

COMPUTER-MEDIATED COMMUNICATIONS:

ALTERNATIVE ENVIRONMENTS FOR LEARNING

Susan M. Rogers

Timothy Wells

Rochester Institute of Technology

INTRODUCTION

Higher education is entering a new era driven by a number of

converging social changes. In response to these changes, many

institutions are developing alternative learning environments, such

as distance learning, to meet the educational needs of their students.

This paper discusses some of the drivers behind this development

and outlines the perspective and distance learning course

development philosophy at the Rochester Institute of Technology

(RIT). Computer-Mediated Communications has been a significant

enabling technology for the development of effective and flexible

distance learning. The major issues confronting the use of computer

conferencing in distance education from the perspective of

administration, faculty/instruction, instructional design and student

services are reviewed and illustrated through a simulated scenario

for understanding the process and emotions that come into play

during a distance delivered course using computer communications.

THE DEMAND FOR DISTANCE LEARNING

The demand for educational access solutions is being driven by

changes in three interrelated areas. First is the change in the student.

Non-traditional students have begun to out number traditional age

students on university campuses. In many fields, people are faced

with a need to renew their educational skills several times during

their careers. In some fields, almost constant information updating

is required. These learners who are busy, working adults with a

great many demands on their lives, are not well served by

traditional educational structures. The need to provide effective,

lifelong educational experiences to the world's population is

becoming a priority for educators.

Second is the evolving view of knowledge which defines learning in

terms of students constructing knowledge for themselves rather than

receiving knowledge from a teacher (Newman, Griffin & Cole,

1989). As mentioned above, the dramatic rate of change in

information alone is forcing us to realize that we don't need an

educated population, but rather that we need to become a nation of

learners who combine work and education. In the midst of our

knowledge explosion, it is clear that knowledge is not finite or

stable, and therefore "schooling" is never over. Learning must

become an active and ongoing process rather than a test of

memorization skills based on some accepted notion of "core

knowledge." Even within school settings, the need for situating

learning within functional contexts is seen as important for learning

to transfer to tasks outside of the school setting (Lave & Wenger,

1991). At the same time, people require education which is better-

timed for their needs. Skills and knowledge which are learned in a

classroom setting, often months away from their application in a

real-life setting, can be lost quickly (Resnick, 1987).

And finally, the availability of new communications technologies

now offer exciting new opportunities and tools for teaching and

learning (Pea & Gomez, 1992; Scardamalia & Bereiter, 1991).

Traditional modes of education are based on the need to gather

around the scarce resources of a learned person and printed thought.

Today the world of recorded knowledge is richer, more spontaneous

and more transportable than it has been in the past.

Telecommunications networks have the potential to interconnect

students, teachers and information resources in a conversation of

learning that is free from many of the constraints of time, place and

physical handicap. While the impact of being able to store sound and

moving images is just beginning to be felt in some areas of

scholarship, we are beginning to see what the new technologies can

mean for embedding education into everyday settings where it can

be more immediately and meaningfully applied (Kubota, 1991;

Brown, 1985).

These changing social conditions have resulted in an increased

demand for alternative educational environments at institutions like

the Rochester Institute of Technology (RIT). Distance education is

no longer a marginal activity at RIT; it is becoming an important

means of providing access to educational opportunities and

resources. Distance learning has the potential of meeting the new

educational demands because it can provide instructionally effective,

highly interactive learning experiences which are flexible, equitable

and responsive to individual needs (Verduin & Clark, 1991).

EVOLUTIONARY DESIGN FOR DISTANCE LEARNING

In many cases, distance learning has been limited by investment in

systems which view the role of technology as replicating

classroom instruction as closely as possible. Indeed, a faculty

member at one seminar on distance education remarked, "I don't

want to change anything I'm doing--I want to use my same

overheads--I just want to push the back wall of the classroom back

1,000 miles." Many researchers suggest opportunities for future

application of highly evolved "distributed multimedia learning

environments" which will "foster transferal of knowledge through

communication technologies, rather than seeking a single, integrated

solution to meet instructional needs. A rich and adaptive learning

environment can be constructed to improve on the weaknesses of the

classroom. By involving faculty in decisions regarding the selection

of instructional tools, and using technologies more familiar to

faculty and students, the development of new distance learning

environments can be driven by the needs of the learner and learning

situation, rather than by the pre-selection of a specific method of

delivery.

RIT's approach is one that is built on the belief that by selecting

from a range of technologies based on their unique instructional

strengths, distance learning can provide a rich learning environment

with affords:

individually responsive time frames for learning activities;

multiple representations of information;

learning which is situated within a real-world context;

participation of all learners without limitations of class time;

opportunities for inclusion of learners with special needs; and

a community of learners based on intellectual interests rather than

physical proximity.

DISTANCE LEARNING AT RIT

Currently six RIT degree programs are available to students who

may never attend regular classes on-campus. Therefore, distance

learning strategies must be sufficiently flexible to meet the demands

of a range of content areas. In developing instructional programs for

RIT learners at a distance, the constraints of the learners, their

location, and the subject matter of the course drives the selection of

instructional approaches. The instructional strengths and

opportunities provided by each communication technology are

considered, along with its weakness or disadvantages. Instructional

experiences are offered at the place and time of the learner's

choosing as much as possible, while still taking advantage of

instructional strengths of group interaction. Faculty receive

assistance and guidance in the use of available instructional

technologies to enable them to have more control over their distance

teaching methods. At the same time they are oriented to what will be

a changed role for them in a distance learning environment. Rather

than viewing themselves as information providers, they are

encouraged to see themselves as facilitators and mentors for

learning. They are encouraged to explore special instructional

demands of their own discipline which might be addresses through a

new instructional strategy. (Sadly, for many college-level instructors,

this may be the first time anyone has asked them to seriously

examine their instructional methods or their own view of

knowledge.) In addition, students may receive assistance in

becoming familiar with a new type of instructional approach to help

them both with the technology as well as to encourage active

involvement in their own learning (Gunstone & Northfield, 1992).

In course design, the instructional objectives and tasks are analyzed

based on the presentation, interaction, practice, and assessment

demands of the particular subject matter. Unless it is a

new offering or special training program, course objectives are

usually already set by the offering department. The learning

objectives for a course will not vary due to the delivery methods;

distance and on-campus courses are equivalent in terms of credit and

recognition by the university. But each task within a course can be

explored to discover the essential features required for the

instructional technologies to build the course's learning

environment. The following table presents examples elements

presentation, interaction, and practice elements that will need to be

supported by the delivery technology, within the overall framework

of the course objectives:

PRESENTATION INTERACTION PRACTICE

Faculty

Declarative Knowledge Reinforcement Skill Development

Procedural Knowledge Problem solving Engagement

Schema building Tutorials Transfer of

Pacing Peers Knowledge

Motivation Cohort building

Collaboration

Resources

Libraries

Data bases

THE ROLE OF COMPUTER-MEDIATED COMMUNICATIONS

Providing appropriately responsive communication and interaction

between the distant student and faculty is a continuing challenge.

However, it is the strength of ongoing interaction with faculty and

other students which distinguishes university instruction from

purchased self-instructional programs or mass educational

programs. Mail, individual telephone calls and class meetings

provide the oldest forms of interaction for distance courses;

however RIT quickly realized the need to augment existing

telephone and mail channels with audioconferencing and computer-

mediated communications. With these additions, our distance

courses have become increasingly interactive and permit a learning

environment which surpasses most classroom settings for supporting

student participation and interaction (Coombs, 1989). Computer-

mediated communications allows for time and place independence,

and at the same time enhances interaction, among groups and

individuals, unlike almost any other communications technology or

instructional approach (Berge & Collins, 1995; Mason, 1990;

Harasim, 1989). Using personal computers and modems, learners

are able to create and submit homework, receive feedback, take a

self-test, interact with their instructor and others, and access

software, library resources and advisory information.

The strength of the computer is that in most cases students and

faculty do not have to be on line at the same times to benefit from

their interactions. While the equipment is somewhat less pervasive,

connections to the computer system can take place through the same

telephone link as an audioconference. As an example, through the

world-wide Internet, a student can log on from the United Kingdom

and be involved in a discussion in an RIT course. While on-line he

or she can also send a personal note to a fellow student and check the

library catalog for a reference source.

GETTING STARTED

In 1985, RIT began the process in introducing computer-mediated

communication into its distance learning courses. In preparation, a

survey of students was conducted that revealed that 75% of current

distance learning students had access to a computer either at home or

at work. A license for conferencing software that would run on the

institution's existing VAX cluster was purchased and, at the time,

NOTES was one of only two alternatives, so the decision was not as

complex as it would be today. Two courses were selected to pilot

the use of computer communications: Introduction to

Computers and Programming and Modern American History. These

were selected first based on faculty interest and on the diversity of

subject matter and student interest in the system.

A decision was made to loan modems and software and to develop

relatively simple documentation to allow students to focus on the

content of their course rather than the complications of computer

connectivity. The institution also made a commitment to provide

connectivity to students regardless of their physical location without

requiring additional long-distance charges. This philosophy was

built on the assumption that the telecommunication network was the

equivalent of the classroom, and thus should be provided by the

university. A combination of local dial-up connections, nationally

distributed dial-up "points of presence" and a toll-free number

continue to be used to provide the flexible and ubiquitous

connections required by RIT's geographically dispersed and

increasingly mobile students. Students were required to provide

what was determined to be their "standard" learning tools, such as a

telephone, television, VCR and computer. At the time a standard of

VT100 emulation was established. While this sounds very minimal

today, at the time there was some controversy given that the choice

excluded many popular machines in use at the time. This type of

decision confronts RIT today as it seeks to make use of more

sophisticated software systems. Assuring a balance between

pedagogical capabilities and flexible access continues to be a

challenge.

Results with using asynchronous computer conferencing for course

discussions have been especially rewarding. No one is excluded

from participation due to time limitations of the class or

communications barriers. Students for whom English is not their

first language as well as deaf and blind students have found the

conferences especially useful (Coombs, 1989). Faculty have the

ability to reinforce learning objectives and do on-going problem

solving either with individuals or in groups, and students can build

cohort relationships. A measure of the usefulness of the system is its

pervasive integration into the daily operation of the university. Since

its introduction, computer-mediated communications has been

adopted by all but three of the one-hundred and fifty distance

delivered courses at RIT and supports many of the administrative

functions of distance learning as well. While we first licensed the

software to support distance learning courses, it is now being use to

support committee work, on-line counseling services and general

institutional "chatter." In addition, many faculty who first began

using NOTES in their distance learning courses have extended the

technology to their on-campus courses because it adds a useful

communication capability not available in the classroom. This

integration into the daily communication functions of the university

adds another dimension of complexity to the decision to replace the

software. However, the lack of upgrades to the software and the

inability to integrate graphical notations into the conferences is

driving RIT to at least begin the transition to another solution.

SUMMARY

RIT has developed a distance education system designed to bring

together the unique capabilities of the Institute with the educational

needs of communities of learners in a cost-effective, timely, and

productive fashion. While we have had excellent results with

computer-mediated communication, we continue to insist that the

instructional demands of the subject matter and the appropriateness

of instructional technologies to deliver it should guide the adoption

of alternatives. As with all choices, economic issues drive the

feasibility of alternatives. Cost-benefit analysis must take into

account as many issues as possible. We need to recognize the shifts

in costs between student and institution. Finally, the willingness of

the institution and its faculty to view the new technology as means to

significant change and improvement, rather than a supplemental

activity, must be considered when assessing the feasibility of an

alternative learning method. The preparation of faculty and support

staff to change their methods, as well as the comfort level of the

learners, can be major concerns. In addition, the hidden reward

systems and politics of the institution must be considered in the

selection of alternatives.

The underlying assumption for RIT's distance learning program is

that the evolving technological alternatives must be responsive to

educational needs. We believe the key to future success in

establishing alternative learning environments will be the ability to

connect appropriate technological solutions to instructional

problems. Then future technological developments will provide even

greater opportunities to expand and improve instructional efforts.

REFERENCES

Berge, Z. L. & Collins, M. P. (1995). Computer Mediated

Communication and the Online Classroom, Volumes I-III.

Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press, Inc.

Bransford, J., Hasselbring, T., Barron, B., Kulewicz, S.,

Littlefield, J. & Goin, L. (1987). Uses of macro-contexts to

facilitate mathematical thinking. In R. Charles E. Silver (Ed.),

Teaching and evaluating mathematical problem solving. Reston,

VA: NCTM.

Brown, J. S. (1985). Process vs. Product: A perspective on tools

for communal and informal electronic learning. Journal of

Educational Computing Research, 1(2), 179-201.

Clark, R. E.(1983). Reconsidering Research on Learning from

Media. Review of Educational Research, 53, 445-459.

Coombs, N. (1989). Using CMC to overcome physical disabilities.

In Mason, R. & Kaye, A. (Ed.), Mindweave: Communication,

Computers and Distance Education. Oxford: Pergamon Press.

Gunstone, R. & Northfield, J. (1992). Conceptual Change in

Teacher Education: The Centrality of Metacognition. ERIC

Document Service ED 348 342.

Harasim, L. (Ed.). (1989). On-line Education: Perspectives on a

New Environment. New York: Prager/Greenwood.

Kearsley, G. (1985). Training for Tomorrow: Distributed Learning

through Computer and Communications Technology. Reading, MA:

Addison-Wesley.

Kubota, K. (1991). Applying a Collaborative Learning Model to a

Course Development Project (Paper presented at AECT). ERIC

Reference Service ED 331 490.

Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate

peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Mason, R. (1990). Conferencing for mass distance education. In

(Ed.), Proceedings of the Third Guelph Symposium on Computer

Conferencing. Guelph, Ontario: University of Guelph.

Newman, D., Griffin, P. & Cole, M. (1989). The Construction

Zone: Working for cognitive change in schools. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

Pea, R. D. & Gomez, L. M. (1992). Distributed Multimedia

Learning Environments: Why and How? Interactive Learning

Environments, 2, 73-109.

Resnick, L. B. (1987). Learning in School and Out. Educational

Researcher, 16, (9), 13-20.

Salomon, G. (1984). Television is "easy" and print is "tough": The

differential investment of mental effort in learning as a function of

perceptions and attributions. Journal of Educational Psychology,

76, 37-68.

Scardamalia, M. & Bereiter, C. (1991). Higher levels of agency for

children in knowledge-building: A challenge for the design of new

knowledge media. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 1, 37-68.

Verduin, J. R. J. & Clark, T. A. (1991). Distance Education: The

Foundations of Effective Practice. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

===================================================

Top of Page

ACSDE HOME

Order Form

The American Center for the Study of Distance Education (ACSDE)
The Pennsylvania State University
College of Education
110 Rackley Building
University Park, PA 16802-3202
Phone (814) 863-3764 FAX (814) 865-5878
ACSDE@psu.edu
www.ed.psu.edu/ACSDE