e-Guidebook

Introduction

Each week a new chapter is composed based upon extensive research, expanding my knowledge regarding e-education. I will post each week's chapters below for your viewing pleasure.

Chap 1

What exactly is “distance learning”? Distance learning does not have one, be all-end all definition, but rather is a stew of concepts ladled together. Distance learning can be described as a situation where the instructor and the student(s) is physically distanced from each other. Distance learning can also be described as a scenario in which the instructor and the student(s) are distanced in time, or in level of knowledge.

Typically distance education is thought of as being asynchronous, meaning the instructor and the student are in different places, conducting the learning/instructing process at different times/paces. Depending on the course design, there may be synchronous instruction that occurs, meaning the instructor/student conduct a meeting a specific time, the place is not necessarily as important. What is important is that communication occurs between student and instructor, and that technology is used as the medium instead of face-to-face interaction.

Typically distance learning is considered to be learner centered, contrary to many traditional classrooms.

Distance learning provides an opportunity for students to study at their own pace, at their own place (or half way around the world!) and on their own time. Sounds great right? Well, lets look at how distance education actually works.

The concept of distance education is over 150 years old! In the past, distance education occurred via traditional carrier mail. Instructor and student(s) communicated with hand written letters and submitted work via the already in place mail system. Advancements in technology allowed for further advancements in the delivery of curriculum. From the invention of the telegraph, television, radio, audio/visual recordings, and eventually the internet and use of fiber-optic cables, technology played a big roll in distance education. New technology brought about new means of delivery of the curriculum.

So, it can be expected that the better the technology used, the better the resultant education received, right? Wrong actually. As stated in Teaching and Learning at a Distance, “In 1983,Clark wrote in volume 53 of the Review of Educational Research that:

...the best current evidence is that media are mere vehicles that deliver instruction but do
not influence student achievement any more than the truck that delivers our groceries causes changes in nutrition ...only the content of the vehicle can influence achievement.(p.445)”

If that is true, if the type of media used does not ultimately effect the learning outcome, why all the recent hype of investing more and more funds into building newer, faster, better technology infrastructures? (Food for thought)

So if the technology doesn’t affect the learning outcome, what does than? Differing approaches and theories affect the student in distance learning courses. There are many theories related to distance education; here are some brief examples:
Students communicate to facilitate learning, both with the instructor and other students.

Students work is individualized, often learning occurs through learner-centered activities.

By allowing students to work at their own pace, the emphasis is placed on the quality of the work submitted, not necessarily the time/place of submission. This change in evaluation is more learner centered, and often times typical of a distance learning experience.

All this sounds great, and fairly easy to develop, so lets have a look at the issues regarding the start-up of a distance-learning program. First off, there’s the obvious issue regarding technology; a decision must be made as to which type of technology is to be implemented. Beyond that is the staff training for use of that technology, and further staff development for ideal implementation in an educational setting of that technology. There is also the need to restructure the current curriculum for optimal delivery online, which takes time, effort, and often times more training. This can lead to reluctance and initial dissatisfaction of staff members. However, many institutions that have undergone the process of implementing distance learning courses have had only success, noting a substantially higher growth rate in comparison to traditional face-to-face course offerings.

What does all this mean for Fithian International? Simply put- the consideration to modernize the training process and move to a distance learning interface is a wise one. The conversion process may require some initial time and effort, but the increased cost of such will reap higher interest along with increased efficiency in the training process in the long run.




Resources:

Clark,R.(1983).Reconsidering research on learning from media.Review ofEducational Research,
53(4),445–459.
(Simonson, Michael. Teaching and Learning at a Distance: Foundations of Distance Education, 4th Edition. 03/25/2008: Allyn & Bacon, 03/25/2008. 29).


Jones and O'Shea, N, J (Oct 2004). Challenging Hierarchies: The Impact of E-Learning. Higher Education, 48, Retrieved 09/09/2008, from • http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy.uis.edu:2048/stable/4151523?seq=15&Search=yes&term=%22e+learning%22&term=foundation&list=hide&searchUri=%2Faction%2FdoBasicSearch%3FQuery%3D%2522e%2Blearning%2522%2Bfoundation%26wc%3Don%26dc%3DEducation%26dc%3DHistory%26dc%3DHistory%2Bof%2BScience%2B%2526amp%253B%2BTechnology&item=1&ttl=67&returnArticleService=showArticle&resultsServiceName=doBasicResultsFromArticle

Sloan, C (2006). Making the Grade: Online Education in the United States. Retrieved 09/09/2008, from http://www.sloan-c.org/publications/survey/survey06.asp


Chap 2

What is online learning really? Is it simply using the computer to access materials and submit assignments? Nope! To actually learn online, an emphasis must be placed on the learning experience. Simply put, we’re selling a medium or platform, and if our customers (students) are not satisfied, they’ll go elsewhere! To satisfy the needs of today’s online learners, the institution establishing the online learning program must develop the program to allow its users to communicate via various forms (real time and asynchronously), progress through a series of instructions, learn through a multitude of methods and media types, and promote intrinsic motivation.


To start off on the right foot, lets have a look at course design. Typically an online educational course is set up to cater to the learner. This student-centered approach has been tried and true, with research to back it up, as a successful platform design for e-educational environments.


Beyond designing the course to be student centered, successful course designs have shown integration with strongly promoted communication resources and provided an environment where students can interact to construct knowledge. Creating a sense of community for the students is crucial to successful online instruction. The communication within the community should be focused, inquisitive, and constructive; much like that found within a traditional classroom discussion. A well-implemented community providing successful communication via the internet can actually result in students gaining more than they would in a traditional setting! According to a study investing this claim, Souder (1993) states that:

“...the distance learners in this study were observed to gain much more than a traditional
education from their experiences. They gained a broadened network of valuable colleagues,
skills in working with others and collaborating across distances, and many social skills
beyond those offered by traditional settings.”(p.50)

This is a profound claim that truly shows the value of the peer interaction that is present in and so crucial to online education.


As Fithian composes its online educational course, it is important to keep that open-community style communication concept in the forefront of the course design. It is imperative that the course designed by Fithian be student-centered and not only provide but promote communication and interaction amongst its users.

Beyond communication, the motivational needs of the users must be addressed. If Fithian plans to offer a successful online educational program, its “students” must have intrinsic motivation to be responsible for their own learning and work completion. Intrinsic motivation is considered to be the internal desire to complete a task, rather than external such as a reward. Due to the nature of distance learning courses, the learner is typically solely responsible for the completion and submission of work, so the user must be motivated to so in order to be successful. How do we do that you ask? Simple!
Read the above paragraphs again! Ok, maybe not that simple, but honestly, if the course is designed with a focus on the user, and not only provides but promotes community type thought-provoking interaction and communication, and progresses the student through the course with real-world activities that require analysis, collaboration, and synthesis, the student will typically be interested in completing the tasks. It is when the course material is simply delivered “electronically” that you have a lose of intrinsic motivation. The use of real-world problems not only aids in the motivation of the student, but also promotes constructivist learning theories where the students relate recently acquired knowledge to the world around them.
There are various technologies available that support the task of social networking and boosting intrinsic motivation in the online education environment that Fithian could explore and use. Social networks such as Facebook and Myspace do not have to be considered negative influences. Podcasting, cell phones…essentially all forms of media are fair play if used properly. Creative use of already in-place, commonly technologies will also aid in motivating students.
Lastly, when designing a course intended to be delivered to large audiences, it is important to base the course on constructivist theories. As briefly mentioned before, constructivist education puts the ball in the students court so to say; the student individually relates the newly gained knowledge to the world around them, of course influenced by the thought provoking conversation during “class time.” When knowledge isn’t simply just learned, but rather related to the world the student lives in, that knowledge is committed to the long term memory for future use. Also, by designing a course to be user-centered, the instructor is not simply grading numerous “copies” of the same submitted work-each student constructed piece will have a unique spin on it reflecting the collaborative efforts from discussions and the world surrounding that student. This also provides the instructor with an opportunity to give thought provoking, motivating feedback.
In addition to designing the course to promote intrinsic motivation, in depth communication, and constructivist individualized activities, Fithian can also prepare students for the online environment. Students have shown to do better in online educational courses when they are provided with a rational for participating in the course and provided with an explanation of how the course will benefit them.










References:

Ally, M, V.Ambrock, T Anderson, D Annand, D Caplan, L Claerhout, A. Davis, F Elloumi, P Fahy, & others (2004). Theory and Practiceof Online Education . AB Canada: Athabasca University.

Souder,W.E.(1993).The effectiveness oftraditional vs.satellite delivery in three management of
technology master’s degree programs.The American Journal ofDistance Education,7(1),37–53.
(Simonson, Michael. Teaching and Learning at a Distance: Foundations of Distance Education, 4th Edition. 03/25/2008: Allyn & Bacon, 03/25/2008. 87).



Chap 3

There are many, many technologies that can be used for educational purposes. Learning technologies range from simple printed text to more complex multi-media, to digitalized-real life environments. All varying technologies have their place, and if used appropriately, can greatly enhance the learning process.
Take for instance printed text. Printed text has been around hundreds of years, and until recently was the most popular technology used in distance education. As stated in previous chapters, correspondence education relied heavily on printed materials and the Postal Service, and was successful for distance learning.
More recently, printed text has been pushed aside to the back-burner, although still used widely. Multi-media has seemingly taken the lead in the most used distance education technology, and for many reasons.
Multi-media can, and often does, incorporate written text. However, where printed text needs to be read to be comprehendible, multi-media makes use of varying delivery methods often including video, still imagery and audio along with the text. This provides the learner with multiple methods of learning, and often time keeps the learner’s attention and focus much better than simple printed text. Typically multi-media is most effective when delivered via the internet.
Since the ultimate goal of Fithian is to use the internet to educate at a distance, it is highly recommended that Fithian pursue the use of multi-media in its course design and delivery.
Besides keeping the learner’s attention, and delivering the material in a manner that accommodates multiple learning facets and promotes interactive thought processes, it is important to keep learner presence in mind when designing distance learning courses over the web.
Social presence is a buzz term these days, and rightfully so. In the past, social presence was ignored (correspondence learning) and while the courses were successful, enrollment was not high. New course designs, relevant to today’s technologically savvy crowd and incorporating high levels of social presence have seen large jumps in course enrollment. Again, since the ultimate goal of Fithian is to enroll as many distance learners as possible and educate them, factors such as social presence must be addressed.
So what exactly is social presence? Social Presence takes many forms, but mostly, addresses the need for individuals (especially e-learners) to feel present in the class, in other words, make the online environment more like that of a traditional classroom, where a student would be physically present. There are many ways of addressing this need.
As noted through our research, applications such as SecondLife promote a sense of student community through the use of avatars (online, user controlled, digitalized self-images). But that’s just one technology applied to the student’s need of social presence. How else could that need be addressed?
Student feedback on course design has shown that students learn better through a course that is interactive and individualized (note, holds attention and uses primarily constructivist approaches), and promotes strong social presence not only through technology but also through the course design itself. As stated in previous chapters, a course, no matter what technology used, that promotes strong interaction and communication between students and staff is usually much more successful than a course which does not.
There are many tools that support communication for distance learners. Take for instance VoIP communication software, allowing users to verbally communicate through the internet. All that is needed is the software (usually downloadable for users), a microphone for speaking into, and speakers for audibly hearing the other user. Recent progress in VoIP allows users to not only “call” other VoIP users, but virtually any number including cell phones!
Other technologies, such as interactive “whiteboards” allow for drawings, sketches, notes, and virtually anything else you would typically write down on a whiteboard to be transferred between two locations simultaneously for distanced discussion and learning.
Of course, do not forget web2.0 technologies such as blogs, wikis, podcasts, instant messaging, etc as useful technologies for distance learning. All of said technologies are common in today’s e-learning environments because they increase social presence and allow for the creation of new knowledge based on the communal synthesis of knowledge. According to Blooms taxonomy simple memorization or recall of knowledge are low forms of learning, where as synthesis and creation of new data are high forms of learning. Through the use of blogs and wiki, among many other educational technologies, students actively synthesis and create knowledge, resulting in high levels of knowledge acquisition.
One thing to keep in mind when using multiple technologies and multi-media presentation of content is that the users will also be using varying levels of technology. There are several key rules to remember when using multi-media or multiple technologies:
• Connection speed may vary, resulting in “lapse” of time or quality loss
• Display issues resulting from varying screen size (what looks great on your 20” desktop screen may not appear so great on a 13” laptop)
• Due to possible reduction in quality, learning might be effected.

Ultimately, it is not the specific technology used, but rather the manner in which it is applied that is more important. Much research has been conducted regarding student’s needs in course design and that research shows that if the course is designed properly, regardless of the content, the course is likely to be more successful.
Lucky for Fithian, all these suggestions of varying technology and presentation formats aid in the design of a successful course! Each of the above technologies promotes social presence and helps present course content in a manner which is individualized and learner centered, regardless of which specific technology is chosen!


Chap 4

Stemming off the previous chapter covering design technologies, lets take a deeper look into design strategies. There are several questions that need to be addressed when discussing design of e-courses. For instance, what happens if there is a technology problem? What would the plan B be? How do you make up for the loss of visual cues during face-to-face interaction? How will you address the audience most effectively? Who is responsible for designing the course? All these questions and many more, need to be looked at as a you, Fithian enter the world of online education.
For starters, lets rid the initial fear rising question- What happens if the technology fails, and what would our plan B be? That’s actually a much less scary question than it first appears. A properly designed course addresses this issue at the beginning of the course. Students in a well designed course are instructed at the course’s start of what to if there is a technical issue. Typically, the answer is to direct students to technical personnel, or create ‘outside of class’ contact means such as email or phone in the event of technical failure. Technical failure does not occur often, but in the event of its happening, providing the students with a procedure to follow allows for a ‘painless’ transition.
The desire to make online interaction closely resemble face-to-face interaction brings up the question of visual cues. How do we get visual cues from our audience to know if they are understanding and following the content? Certainly the use of video equipment in the classroom is one option, but what if synchronous interaction via video is not possible? This is a tricky question; but the solution is built right into the course design! A well designed course provides students with a schedule to follow, and multiple means of acquiring their knowledge in time to follow that schedule. The schedule helps set the student pace for self-monitoring and comparison to their learning pace, and the multiple mode of content delivery allow the student to use differing means of knowledge acquisition, aiding in the learning process.
There is also the use of forums to address the loss of face-to-face interaction. Not only do forums promote social presence, as mentioned in previous chapters, forums create a way for instructors to monitor student progress through the course. Many times in successful online learning courses, students are directed to post class questions, whether they are technical or content based in manner, in the student forums. As an instructor, you can monitor and address these forums to ensure student needs are met.
The forum, along with addressing students’ needs, allows feedback for the instructor to be mindful of the students pacing. It is important to ensure students stay focused and on track, but don’t work too far ahead so to avoid missing out on committing the newly acquired knowledge to long term memory.
The forums are also good for addressing student technical issues, varying from as severe as “the server failed” to as minor as “I cant submit work” or “display appears funny.” If one student suffers from a technical issue, it is likely another student suffers from the same dilemma, and by posting it in the forum, it is like raising a hand in a classroom, all forum readers become aware of the issue, share in its answering and solution process.
As a company, it will be important for Fithian to know their audience for successful e-learning to take place. Just as with any successful presentation, knowing the audience and the audience’s purpose helps guide the delivery methods and promote knowledge acquisition and transfer. Some important stats to know of your audience are: age, previous knowledge level, purpose for taking the course, and what are their expectations of the course? Knowing this helps guide the delivery of content, schedule the activities and due dates, and aids in the process of relating the content to the students, resulting in a more successful e-learning environment.
With all this talk about course design, the next logical question is, “Who’s responsible for designing the course?” That question can be answered simply since Fithian is new to the online environment and therefore does not have an abundance of staff and segmented departments specifically for e-learning. Basically, two concepts need to be covered, often times done by two or more people. First up is covering the course content, what will be delivered to the students. Second up is addressing the technical issues regarding the delivery of that content. In an ideal world, these two concepts are addressed simultaneously and congruently, resulting in a smoother integration of content and delivery for the student. This ideal setup would create an online environment that would be most successful for the student(s). If an ideal world is not achievable, simply keeping contact and interaction between the two concepts will facilitate a smoother integration. It is imperative that the course content be designed for online delivery, not simply converted for online format.
Ultimately, the successful online course is created with the design and content in mind. A well designed course also allows for high social presence, such as with the use of forums. It is also common of successful online environments to be proactive, rather than reactive; providing the students with procedures in the event of technical or personal issues.

Chap 5

With distance education, the role of the instructor is often shifted from that of a lecturer or presenter to that of a facilitator or guide. The distance instructor typically does not follow the methods many traditional instructors follow which seeks to ‘transfer knowledge’ to the students. The traditional approach to teaching is just that, an approach to teaching, centered on the teacher. Distance educators many times find themselves focused more on the learning process rather than the teaching process; stepping away from ‘teacher centered’ and entering the realm of ‘student centered educational methods. A distance educator has to be flexible, willing to morph with both the technology and process of learning, and furthermore, assessing that learning process.
Previous chapters have covered the technology pertaining to distance education; lets take this moment to discuss the role of the instructor using that technology in a ‘virtual’ learning environment.
First the word ‘virtual’ must be replaced with ‘online.’ Virtual implies something unreal, and the learning that takes place in a virtual learning environment is certainly real. The instructor may not be lecturing, or standing in front of a room of intellectual ‘sponges,’ but learning is still occurring. In fact, according to several researchers, the learning in an online distance setting often is higher than the learning in a traditional classroom!
Right, so now that that is taken care of, lets have a look at the instructor’s role. As noted, the instructor of an online course ‘takes a back seat’ so to say, stepping down from his/her podium and shifting the power from his/her own hands into those hands of the students. According to Hartman et al (2007), the focus is lifted from the instructor and placed on the students. This results in a constructivist, learner centered approach to distance education. Also, the instructor often is seen as the creator of a learning environment, rather than a lecturer.
Today’s 12-25 year olds, known as the Net Gen see online technologies including social networks, IM’ng, etc as an environment, not simply a tool (Hartman et al 2007). These ‘kids’ are digital natives, being taught by a generation that is older and therefore digital immigrants. It is the role of the online instructor to acquire the skills to apply the technology use in an educational environment, providing today’s learner’s with an opportunity for asynchronous and synchronous online collaborative learning. Notice, the focus is off the quality of teaching and on the quality of learning.
Corbeil et al (2007) reinforces Hartman et al’s claims that technology is seen as an environment, rather than a tool, by many of today’s learners. Corbeil et al (2007) state that today’s learners are looking for mobile accessibility, and today’s instructors should begin designing their content to be delivered in a more mobile friendly manner. Podcasts, IM/Text messenging, smartphones, pocketPCs, etc are becoming more popular among today’s Net Gen and technologically savvy populations. The concept of transferring knowledge through long-winded lectures is out the window when mobility is in mind. Corbeil et al (2007) recommend creating specific content segments that are short and cover only one topic, and focus on the learner’s environment rather than a classroom.
Speaking of content delivery, lets take another look at the course syllabus. We have already discussed in previous chapters that the course syllabus is important and needs to be informative. Simonson et al (2009) claim in distance education,“The syllabus is the single most important document an instructor can prepare” (p191). As an online instructor it is important to clearly illustrate not only your role, but the role of your students as well. The syllabus helps outline the course structure, expectations, and assessment, along with defining the role of the student. Today’s students exhibit a role shift just as today’s educators do. Online learners are seen as collaborative learners, synthesizing and creating knowledge throughout the learning process in dynamic forums, wikis, blogs, and other multi-media modes. In a discription of online learners Oblinger and Hawkins (2006) state that, “besides being a listener, the [online] student might be an apprentice, builder, mentor, peer teacher, team member, or writer.”
Getting back to the role of the instructor, often times the instructor is seen as an “architect, consultant, resource, reviewer, or role model” (Oblinger and Hawkins, 2006) instead of as a simple lecturer. In order to shift roles more efficiently, according to Oblinger and Hawkins (2006) often times instructors are paired with instructional designers, resulting in a more efficient and smooth course creation. Remember from previous chapters, the course design is important; one cannot simply “copy” printed materials designed for face-to-face delivery into the online classroom. As noted earlier, today’s instructor is seen as a learning environment designer, not just a lecturer.
As a learning environment designer, one role the online instructor plays is that of the facilitator of active learning communities and discussions. According to Simonson et al (2009) a general rule of thumb for facilitating online forums as an instructor is to respond to only “One in four” posting made by students (p187). In doing so, the conversation is kept between the students, constantly creating and evolving the knowledge, and only guided by the instructor to ensure the conversation remains on track and the knowledge gained is correct.
These forums also bring up an interesting perspective on assessment. Since the knowledge is often formed and gained collaboratively, how does one assign credit to individual students? As an instructor in online educational environments, it is important to be flexible and keep the learning objectives in mind. Students should receive credit for achieving learning objectives.
These conversations in forums, the formation of collaborative knowledge works, and the course design are in the spotlight today. Who has ‘property rights’ over this material? Is it the instructor, the university, or the instructional designer? Perhaps a bit of all three? What about the students’, is their intellectual property owned by them, or by the institution? Oblinger and Hawkins (2006) point out questions such as these, but do not answer them. The answer to these questions is dependant upon the institution and the agreement made with faculty members.
So far, a lot of talk has been given regarding the role of the instructor in an online learning environment, but not too many reference to what this means for Fithian have been made. Fithian has primarily been training its employees with traditional educational methods. Online distance education has some similarities and some differences to traditional educational methods, and knowing these will help Fithian be more efficient and effective online instructors.
If you think of the online classroom environment as being more active, more dynamic, and more student centered than a traditional classroom, then it is easy to see those similarities and differences. The instructor is still a source students use throughout the learning process, only the instructors role of “know it all” is removed and the instructor becomes part of the active learning environment. Instead of a monologue or perhaps dialog between instructor and students, often times dynamic discussions take place and knowledge is created rather than memorized. The instructor still plays the role of reviewer, establishing expectations and assessing student progress. Note, the term student progress, or student performance is used instead of simply ‘testing’ the students in a traditional classroom.
Fithian online instructors will have to be flexible, offering multiple instructional methods, assessment methods, and willing to shift with the student body and technological changes. It would benefit Fithian greatly to know its student body well, as discussed in previous chapters. If Fithian keeps the syllabus dynamic, and alters the content delivery methods to best match its audience, Fithian will be making a move towards success in online education.
Fithian’s online instructors should follow the guidelines laid out in this chapter, acting more as a guide than a lecturer while journeying down the path to success in online education.





References:


Corbeil, J, & Valdes-Corbeil, M (2007). Are You Ready for Mobile Learning? . EDUCAUSE Quarterly, 30, Retrieved October 6, 2008, from http://connect.educause.edu/Library/EDUCAUSE+Quarterly/AreYouReadyforMobileLearn/40029.

Hartman, J, Dziuban, C, & Brophy-Ellison, J Faculty 2.0. EDUCAUSE Review, 42, Retrieved 10/6/08, from http://connect.educause.edu/Library/EDUCAUSE+Review/Faculty20/44995.

Oblinger, D, & Hawkins, B (2006). The Myth about Online Course Development “A Faculty Member Can Individually Develop and Deliver an Effective Online Course.”. EDUCAUSE Review, 41, Retrieved October 6, 2008, from http://connect.educause.edu/Library/EDUCAUSE+Review/TheMythaboutOnlineCourseD/40610.

Simonson, M, Smaldino, S, Albright, M, & Zvacek, S (2009). Teaching and Learning at a Distance. Boston: Pearson Education Inc.

Yang, Y, & Cornelious, L (2005). Preparing Instructors for Quality Online Instruction. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 8, Retrieved October 6, 2008, from http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/spring81/yang81.htm.

Chap 6
One of the roles of the distance instructor (or any presenter for that matter) is to know their audience, in this case, students. Knowing the learner can have great impacts on the way content is delivered, the content itself, and how assessment and interaction will occur. The learner is perhaps the most important aspect of an online learning environment, seeing as most pedagogical theories for e-learning are student-centered. As Fithian is nearing its decision to incorporate online distance training into their program, it is essential that the learner be the focus throughout the process. Lets take a look at today’s distance learner.
According to Hanson et al, (1997) the early concept of online learners is related to previous correspondence type distance education, the learner being an adult, often times employed, and with social and family responsibilities. Lambert (2000) claims that at that time, the average online learner was mid thirties in age, majority of the online student body being male and married, and roughly half having some prior college education. These students may have chosen to be online students based on their need to maintain their other responsibilities.
Recent research shows that the online student body is getting younger, and more technologically savvy. These students often desire the online learning environment, rather than the traditional face-to-face atmosphere. According to Dabbagh (2007) today’s learner is dynamic, constantly evolving and responsive to technological advancements, and is composed of a younger age bracket.
For Fithian, this means that the future distance learners through your program will be varied, including tech savvy Net Gen youth, eager to learn through the online environment, and ‘older’ generations perhaps not as motivated to use the internet as their learning medium.
Successful online students do have a few things in common, regardless of their ‘generation.’ A successful online student is often self-motivated, aware of their own learning styles and able to adapt and modify for increased efficiency, and has a positive attitude toward the course. Often times, distance learners also desire the flexibility of work scheduling that is present in distance education settings.
According to Oblinger (2005) the older ‘generations’-those being previous to Net Gen students and including today’s faculty, consider technology to include blogs, wikis, podcasts, and IM/texting while today’s Net Gen students often do not consider those forms of technology. The Net Gen grew up with such technologies already integrated into their daily lives, and hence often view new technology as something that is customizable and provides a means for communication.
However the use of technology isn’t necessarily key to attracting today’s youth. Prenksy (2005) claims that today’s youth require engagement more than anything else. According to Prensky’s research, students are not performing successfully in school not because of short attention spans, but because what we (as educators) are asking the students to be attentive to isn’t as engaging as their other forms of media use (in particular video games and the internet).
According to Windham (2005) today’s Net Gen learners are highly capable of multi-tasking. Net Gen learners can often successfully manage more than one IM conversation, watching a TV show, downloading music, and conducting online research, all while studying! Almost all classroom situations are not nearly this demanding, and not nearly as interactive.
Research shows that today’s students crave interactivity and communication with others, be it peers or faculty. Fithian should focus on meeting the student needs of interaction when designing their distance learning course. This is a continuation of topics previously covered here, we now that ultimately one goal of a distance learning course is to replicate the face-to-face interaction that is lacking at a distance. There are many methods of doing so, see previous chapters covering pedagogy and technology for that info.
Fithian can assess their online students through pre-requisite courses (which would provide all students entering the Fithian program an equal knowledge/ability base), through questionnaires asking questions such as “Why are you taking this distance course and what are your goals upon completion of the course?” and through various other methods.
It is more important at a distance, where face-to-face visual cues are not present, to truly know the audience and adapt the presentation to suit the audiences’ needs. Today’s online learning audience is diverse, and addressing the individual needs of the learner are key for a successful program.





REFERENCES:
Dabbagh, N. (2007). The online learner: Characteristics and pedagogical implications. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education [Online serial], 7(3). Available: http://www.citejournal.org/vol7/iss3/general/article1.cfm

Hanson, D., Maushak, N. J., Schlosser, C. A., Anderson, M. L., Sorensen, C., & Simonson, M. (1997). Distance Education: Review of the Literature (2nd ed.). Bloomington, Indiana: Association for Educational Communications and Technology.

Lambert, M.P. (2000). The home study inheritance. In M.G. Moore & N. Shin (Eds.), Speaking personally about distance education foundations of contemporary practice (pp. 7-11). University Park, PA: The American Center for the Study of Distance Education at The Pennsylvania State University

Oblinger, Diana (2005). Asking the Right Question. EDUCAUSE Review, 40, Retrieved Oct 10, 2008, from http://connect.educause.edu/Library/EDUCAUSE+Review/AskingtheRightQuestion/40536

Prensky, M (2005). “Engage Me or Enrage Me”: What Today’s Learners Demand . EDUCAUSE Review, 40, Retrieved 10/13/08, from http://connect.educause.edu/Library/EDUCAUSE+Review/EngageMeorEnrageMeWhatTod/40579

Windham, Carie (2005). Father Google and Mother IM: Confessions of a Net Gen Learner. EDUCAUSE Review, 40, Retrieved Oct 10, 2008, from http://connect.educause.edu/Library/EDUCAUSE+Review/FatherGoogleandMotherIMCo/40578


Chap 7
As Fithian creates its e-learning course, it is imperative that management of the course be thought of throughout the design process, not just tacked on to the top of the final project. Fithian needs to address several key concepts while considering the administrative aspects of the course project. Some of those key concepts revolve around intellectual property ownership, faculty credit and compensation of efforts, and policies regarding the hierarchy and ‘team’ of the staff and faculty involved throughout the process.
Intellectual property (or IP) is a hot topic area right now. As Fithian designs its course, it will be important to address this issue. Intellectual Property can be thought of as materials created, musically, artistically, or for commercial purposes, and the legal rights associated with those materials. Copyright covers many of the materials, but with technology advancing as fast as it is today, copyright laws don’t always have a firm grasp on the fair use right of materials. Fair use is an exception to using copyrighted materials without first having permission to do so. Today’s internet capabilities, combined with lack of knowledge on both student and faculty, have proven to cause many cases surrounding fair use and intellectual property ownership.
For Fithian, one way to address this issue according to Stein (2001), is to model the compensation and distribution of Intellectual Property ownership after the motion picture industry. The motion picture industry (and the music industry) create materials with a team approach. Members heavy in the design and creation of those materials are given credits (literally with motion pictures!) which often translate into compensatory means. Members of the team not associated with the design and creation, but still vital to the process are often not given credits but receive a flat pay rate.
If Fithian addresses the IP management issue in this manner, laying out a clearly stated policy for faculty and support staff, the main issue of “who owns what” is covered. Beyond that, team creation allows for multiple ‘experts’ in multiple fields to combine efforts, creating a much better course than if one person were to create it all. Providing credits for the creation of material, much like a TV or movie, also sets a high standard and level of prestige when the course is inevitably passed on to be taught by another faculty member.
According to Keiser (2004), that same technology that is creating a mess of the Fair Use policy and copyright laws, is also benefiting faculty and staff. New technologies are making the jobs of many easier, and Keiser summons the old saying ‘Work smarter, not harder.’ Part of Fithian’s management policies must then include the training and support of staff utilizing the technology. Keiser also points out that a very important role of a manager today is to ensure faculty understand that technology does not decrease that faculty member’s importance to the company, in fact, it actually increases it! Providing staff with a sense of job security has always been an important role of an administrator, however with rapid technology growth it is imperative today that faculty feel secure. Pair that sense of security with a sense of ownership through credits as stated above, and an environment catering to high quality workmanship is beginning to evolve.
Keiser also suggests not working faculty on overload, but rather shifting the workload through the use of technology as stated above. Keeping the faculty from being overloaded increases work efficiency, and decreases costs, as Fithian begins to see the financial constraints of their project.
Simonson et. al (2009) there are several methods Fithian could choose to estimate the total cost of creating an online course. Two methods that stand out are the ‘Best Estimate Method’ and the ‘Screen Count Method.’ The Best Estimate Method sums the individual costs of overload-instructor fees, subject matter expert fees, production fees, etc; creating a total of all estimated fees based on hourly rates. The Screen Count Method gives a rough estimate, stating that each screen will cost roughly $250, and then multiplying that dollar amount by the estimated number of screens anticipated for the course. Obviously as Fithian begins totally up expenses, it will be important to keep costs down where possible, and not overloading instructors minimizes costs along with keeping moral high.
Also, according to Solomon (2005) Fithian should address the issue of course credit through management policies. Does Fithian plan on having teaching staff from outside their ‘district’? If so, how will the teaching credentials be verified and credits given to students? What if a student is in another country? Solomon does not offer suggestions for addressing these issues, only notes that these are concepts that require attention prior to the start of the course.
As stated in previous chapters, it is important that Fithian address support issues for faculty and students. From a managerial standpoint, Fithian’s administrators should emphasize that the faculty should act as a team, working closely with all members throughout the creation of the course. Policies should be created regarding the support of students and faculty.
As Fithian is deciding to adventure into online course delivery, the management of the process is important to the success of the course. Administration needs to be up to date with knowledge of technology and curriculum, be flexible, and address the needs of the faculty and student bodies. Since cost is always a factor, Fithian should examine its practices to ensure the highest cost efficiency is being achieved.



Refernces:

Besek, J (2003). Copyright: What makes "fair" use?. EDUCAUSE Review, 38, Retrieved 10/1708, from http://connect.educause.edu/Library/EDUCAUSE+Review/CopyrightWhatMakesaUseFai/40446

Keiser, J (2004). Working smarter, not harder. EDUCAUSE Review, 39, Retrieved 10/17/08, from http://connect.educause.edu/Library/EDUCAUSE+Review/WorkingSmarterNotHarder/40487

Simonson, M, Smaldino, S, Albright, M, & Zvacek, S (2009). Teaching and Learning at a Distance. Boston: Pearson Education Inc.

Solomon, G (2005). Shaping e-learning policy. Techlearning, Retrieved 10/20/08, from http://www.techlearning.com/story/showArticle.php?articleID=163100416


Stein, S (2001). The media production model: An alternative approach to intellectual property rights in distributed education. EDUCAUSE Review, 36, Retrieved 10/18/08, from http://connect.educause.edu/Library/EDUCAUSE+Review/TheMediaProductionModelAn/40239