Neil Toporski, Ed.D. and Tim Foley, Ed.D.
Lehigh University
8B E. Packer Avenue
Bethlehem, Pennsylvania 18015
Email: NEIL.TOPORSKI@LEHIGH.EDU and TIM.FOLEY@LEHIGH.EDU
The roots of online learning are deeply grounded in correspondence and distance education (DE) models. From the 1700’s when paper-based correspondence courses started to originate to the early and middle 1900’s where DE experimented with film and radio to the 1970’s where “universities without walls” initiatives employed television and satellite technologies, the evolution of DE advanced both as a consequence of convenience for the distant learner and emerging technologies. While the term “distance education” was coined from the earliest days of correspondence offerings, it is the evolution in technologies that seems to be changing the nature of DE significantly (Demiray & Isman, 1999). That is, newer technologies have cultivated paradigmatic shifts in education (Frick, 1991). In the 1900’s, distance education attempted to mimic the traditional classroom lecture via the transmission of live or “canned” broadcasts regardless of the technologies used: satellite, television, film, or radio. These kinds of media allowed DE to closely adhere to the lecture (sit and absorb) model where content was disseminated in about the same time constraints as a traditional class. That is, classes were taught at scheduled times throughout the week – almost anywhere but not always anytime. Moreover, the modes of presentation in classic DE seemed to hinder the kinds of human interactions normally experienced in the traditional classroom, fostering individualized and isolated learning experiences.
Online learning is different from the classic DE model. Online learning is a hybrid between the traditional classroom and the DE experience. Like the traditional classroom, instruction is teacher-facilitated. The student is enrolled in a conventional course with topic (lecture) presentations, reading and homework assignments, classroom discussions, and class projects. Unlike the traditional classroom, courses are web-based and distributed from a distance, using an assortment of synchronous and asynchronous computer technologies -- but offered anywhere and anytime. In this way, online learning, unlike DE, tends to encourage decentralized and collaborative learning environments. Thus, the connotation “online learning” is separate and different from DE.
Distance Education at Lehigh began in 1991 as a sponsor of live Management of Technology courses to the National Technological University, providing Masters Degree programs via satellite to employees of large corporations. In an effort to leverage the investment in satellite technology, DE launched one of the first digitally compressed satellite networks in the spring of 1992 offering a masters in chemistry to 6 corporate sites. The program has grown rapidly adding Master's Degrees in Chemistry, Chemical Engineering, Environmental Engineering, Quality Engineering, MBA, Molecular Biology, Polymer Science and Engineering, Pharmaceutical Chemistry. Since that time, over 700 distance education students have been admitted to eight Lehigh graduate degree programs through the Lehigh Educational Satellite Network (LESN). Beginning in the Fall of 1999, DE added web-based streaming-video courses to the University's distance education offerings. The LESN-Online program was created to reach students outside of large corporations and to offer a greater variety of programs, ranging from non-credit short courses, to individual credit courses, to credit and non-credit certificate programs, to full degree programs. Around the same time, Lehigh adopted Blackboard as an online course management component for university courses. Blackboard was well received by faculty. Within a year, the number of courses incorporating Blackboard grew to well over 200. Finally, the Clipper Project, a multi-year research and development initiative began in the Spring of 2000. The Clipper Project was funded by the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation to investigate the costs and benefits of Web-based university courses.
THE NEED FOR DESIGN PRINCIPLES
Needless to say, online learning is here to stay at Lehigh. Distance education programs, Blackboard successes, and Clipper online initiatives at Lehigh are considered to be just the tip of the iceberg: the stimuli for further research and online initiatives. In many ways, these initiatives have posed many pedagogical and instructional design questions.
· Can technology support sound pedagogy?
· If online learning de-emphasizes the classroom lecture as the primary source of instruction, then what replaces the lecture? While it is evident that technology is not pedagogy, it is equally evident that online learning offers a more decentralized and constructivistic environment. In this case, the emphasis is on active learning, collaboration, research and investigation, problem-solving, and situated learning contexts.
· Are faculty amenable to re-engineering their courses and adopting online learning strategies? How can Lehigh support these changes?
· Can online learning accommodate different kinds of learners?
· Historically, DE and online courses experience high attrition rates. Is this a result of a lack of motivation? A lack of community and sense of belongingness? Student frustration? A lack of adequate scaffolding?
For the most part, online learning environments (OLEs) are teacher-facilitated, not stand-alone learning contexts. Teachers, as the primary content experts, can construct OLEs to include the kinds of learning experiences and communication tools that help learners to sculpt and assimilate new knowledge. Some key goals to keep in mind when constructing OLEs are:
·
To center
learning around the student. In the traditional classroom, time and distance
are limiting factors to the learning process.
·
To focus on
the needs and strengths of students. As learning becomes more personalized,
students will require the necessary skills and tools to engage and participate
in this new kind of learning process.
·
To provide
just-in-time and anywhere-anytime instruction. OLEs can break the distance and
time barriers by providing learning experiences outside the classroom --
anywhere and anytime. Accordingly,
teachers can adjust presentation and explanations “just-in-time,” when the
student needs it the most.
·
To foster
collaborative learning environments, Collaborative networks provide the sense
of a “learning community.”
·
To focus on
authentic learning experiences. Web-based OLEs can provide authentic frameworks
that bridge computer and classroom instruction. In this way, learning can be
considered to be both an active and engaging experience, where the computer can
help mediate course activities and shape the learning process by providing
"learning by doing" or situated learning contexts.
1. Make it Interactive. An OLE is different from the
classic DE environment: the onus is on the student to become an active
participant rather than a passive recipient of learning. An interactive
learning environment encourages discovery, experimentation, and experiential (hands-on
and activity based) instruction that provides multiple representations of
knowledge. In this way, the learning environment stresses the interrelations
and associations among knowledge and knowledge levels. Active learning is more
effective than passive learning.
2. Keep it Engaging and Motivating. Motivation can be
affected by the task, learning environment, the teacher, and the student. But
without motivation, there can be no learning. Shneiderman (1998) stated that
"memorable educational experiences are enriching and
transformational." Motivation theory argues that relevant experiences
satisfy intrinsic needs or goals, encouraging effort and performance. Some of
the ways that OLEs can foster motivation and increase perceptual arousal are:
(1) incorporating novel, surprising, incongruous and uncertain events; (2) posing questions or problems to solve; (3)
varying the elements of instruction; and (4) using concrete and familiar
examples that are related to learners' a priori experiences. Also,
presenting advanced organizers, explaining the utility of instruction,
providing positive learning experiences, and supporting internal attributions
for success helps sustain learner confidence and satisfaction. Learners should
feel that they are, for the most part, in control of their outcomes and that
their success is a direct result of the amount of effort they have put forth.
3. Put Things in Context. Learners can experience problems using knowledge and skills in everyday contexts. According to Bransford (1986), this inability to make meaningful connections results from the decontextualization of formal learning experiences: That is, the learning of facts is isolated from the contexts in which they derive meaning. Context, then, is seen as a critical environmental factor in how knowledge is assimilated, represented, negotiated, and used. (Hannafin, Land, & Oliver, 1997): How new information is meaningfully connected to prior knowledge.
4. Maintain Diversity. OLEs can support multiple modes of
representation by being able to incorporate various kinds of media such as
text, illustrations, animations, video, audio, and simulations. In this way,
learning can take place through different sensory channels and learning is more
effective when more channels are engaged in learning. Diversity also helps to
keep the student moving, focused, and motivated.
5. Use Collaborative Strategies. Learners are capable of
performing at higher intellectual levels when asked to work in collaborative
environments. Group diversity and experience contributes positively to the
learning process. Bruner (1985) argued that cooperative learning methods
improve problem-solving strategies when learners are confronted with different
interpretations of the given situation. Peer support makes it possible for the
learner to conceptualize both external knowledge and critical thinking skills
and to convert them into tools for intellectual reasoning. Collaboration
involves the mutual engagement of the participants in a coordinated effort to
solve the problem together. The active exchange of ideas within small groups
also generates interest among learners. There is evidence that suggest
cooperative teams achieve at higher levels of thought and retain information
longer than students who work quietly as individuals. Shared learning gives
students an opportunity to engage in discussion, take responsibility for
their own learning, and thus become
critical thinkers.
6. Reduce Cognitive Load. Cognitive load may be seen as
the level of 'mental energy' required to process a given amount of information.
As the amount of information to be processed increases, so does the associated
cognitive load. Cognitive load theory suggests that effective instruction
promotes learning by directing cognitive resources towards activities that are
relevant to learning rather than to processes that are adjunct to learning.
Thus, providing too much information all at once with distracting or competing
information, increases complex information and further exacerbates cognitive
load and associated “mental energy.”
Chunking information into “information bits,” focusing attention to
coincide with explanations, reducing information “overload,” and providing
appropriate scaffolding all aid in the reduction of cognitive load.
7. Provide adequate scaffolding. Supply the necessary
support that a student needs to be successful. That is, as the student
increases in competence, the teacher relinquishes the learning situation to the
student and withdraws support. The move to less scaffolding is achieved by teaching
students problem-solving strategies, fading assistance, and introducing more
complex contexts--to help students distinguish essential and inessential
details (Becker & Carnine, 1981). In other words, there should be a
conscious attempt to foster independent
and higher-order thinking.
Interactions
between peers and teachers provide the kinds of scaffolding and coaching
support which teachers normally bring to the traditional classroom setting.
Mechanisms to support and motivate students isolated in online learning
environments are considered necessary to encourage active participation,
inquiry, discourse, and progress. Moreover, a social context stresses the
importance of learning being germane within the cultural context of the group.
In many ways, the online
learning strategies proposed here are not unlike those strategies currently
used in the traditional classroom environment. Walk into most classrooms and
you will see the teacher providing interactive and motivating instruction: Posing
questions and employing novel and sometimes unexpected instructional
approaches. They keep the class moving by using a diversity of presentation and
theatrical methods. Content is placed in a meaningful context through concrete
and relevant examples. Scaffolding is provided by first showing students how
things are done – then allowing students to take onus of their own learning
experiences. Finally, teachers provide the kinds of activities and experiences
that allow students to see and experience things from different perspectives.
REFERENCES
Becker, W., & Carnine, D. (1981). Direct instruction: A behavior theory model for comprehensive educational intervention with the disadvantaged. In S.W. Bijou & R. Ruiz (Eds.), Behavior modification: Contributions to education (pp. 145-210). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Bransford, J., Sherwood, R., Vye, N., & Rieser, J. (1986). Teaching thinking and problem solving. American Psychologist, 41, 1078-1089.
Bransford, J., & Johnson, M. (1972). Contextual prerequisites for understanding: some investigations of comprehension and recall. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 4 (2), 717-726.
Demiray, U., & Isman, A.. (1999). "History of Distance Education", in 1. chapter of Winds of Changing, 1999, Adapazari, Turkey, (in press)
Frick, T. (1991). Restructuring education through technology. In Phi Delta Kappa Educational Foundation. Bloomington.
Hannafin, M., Hill, J., & Land, S. (1997). Student-centered learning and interactive multimedia: Status, issues, and implications. Contemporary Education, 68(2), 94-99.
Shneiderman, B. (1998). Relate—Create—Donate: A teaching/learning philosophy for the cyber-generation. Computers & Education, 31, 25-39.