Student Support: Your key to success in distance learning

Richard Bothel, Ed.D.Associate Provost for Outreach

University of North Carolina at PembrokePembroke, North Carolina

http://www.uncp.edu/home/bothelr

There has never before been a period during which more forces have had an impact on higher education at one time.

Morrison, J. (1999). Using Information Technology Tools in Education: An Interview with Rodney L. Everhart. On The Horizon (7), No.6.

Educational Services Industry

$800 Billion Yearly

Morrie, K. The Reincarnation of Mike Milken. Business Week, May 10, 1999, pp.92-104. [Available at http://www.forbes.com/forbes/97/0310/5905122a.htm]

Postsecondary Education

$250 Billion yearly

Snyder, T.D. (1998). Digest of Educational Statistics. NCES Publication No. 1999036. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Marcus, D. (2000, January 24). A scholastic gold mine: For-profit companies--and traditional institutions--cash in on a new market. U.S. News and World Report, pp.44-45.

Technology

Most use of technology in universities lacks clear institutional aims.

---Sir John Daniel (1999, May),

Vice-Chancellor, The Open University

Daniel, J.D. 1999. Knowledge Media for the Mega-University: Scaling Up New Technology at the UK Open University. Syllabus 21 May 1999.

Students

18-22 year olds = 25% *

Adult learners = 50% *

Part-time = 40%²

Emerging high school learners ? ? ?

*Morrison, J. (1999). Using Information Technology Tools in Education: An Interview with Rodney L. Everhart. On The Horizon (7), No.6.

² Edgerton, R. (2000). White paper from Director, The PEW Charitable Trusts, PA: Philadelphia. Available: http://www.pewtrusts.com/programs/edu/edwp1.cfm

Web LearnersNumber of online courses doubled from 1998-1999

50,000 to 100,000

Prediction: Learners will expand from 1999-2002

700,000 to 2.2 Million

Berinato, S. (2000, March). Coming After You.University Business, 3 (2), 29-33.

Students

82.9% new freshmen use the Internet

for homework and research

Private: 90.2

Black: 77.6

65.9%Communicate via e-mail

Private: 80.1 e-mail

Black: 41.4

UCL ANNUAL SERVEY OF FIRST-YEAR STUDENTS, American Council on Education, Higher EducationResearch Institute, UCLA Graduate School of Education & Information Studies, Los Angeles. [http://www.acenet.edu/news/press_release/1999/01January/freshman_survey.html]

The first step ...

It all starts by asking, what are we really trying to accomplish with our distance learning programs.

The answer should be framed by what we are trying to to for the student.

Why distance learning ?

• Reach new students– New programs– New populations

• Better support to existing students

• Enhance learning

• Faculty efficiency

• Administrative efficiency

Vision

The most frustrating thing about talking to a Web-oriented person is trying to figure out what the plan is. Usually, when you cut through the jargon, the answer is really, ‘Whaven’t a clue, but we’ve got a lot of stuff up, and when the customers show us what they want, we’d better be ready. The plan is to change the plan.

Berinato, S. (2000, March). Coming After You.University Business, 3 (2), 33.

Vision

Many distance learning programs are being implemented with a vision that is not universally shared and goals that are not clearly understood.

Learning from others . . .

Unrealistic/Uninformed Administrators

• Quick financial returns

• Program monopolies

• Unrealistic assessment of online demand

Learning from others . . .

Corporate partnerships will often bear for-profit motives and not necessarily what is best for the student or society

Learning from others . . .

The so-called entrepreneurial approach that allows individual departments or other units develop their own support will not result in an effective institutional approach to distance learning

Learning from others . . .

Distance learning should not just be a new way to do what we have already done. It should be doing totally new things to support our mission.

Students are #1

What are we doing

for our students?

Benchmarks for Success in Distance Education

Special thanks for this information:The Institute for Higher Education Policy

National Education Association

Blackboard

Two Reports:Quality on the Line: Benchmarks for Success in Internet-Based

Distance Education

A Survey of Traditional and Distance Learning Higher Education Members

Quality On the Line

• Benchmarks for Success in Internet-Based Distance Education– Case study of six campuses that are experienced in

offering distance education

– Conducted by the Institute for Higher Education Policy

– Three areas: teaching/learning, student support, faculty support

The Institute for Higher Education PolicySupported by: NEA and Blackboard

–published April 2000, www.ihep.com–Free copy, http://www.ihep.com/quality.pdf

Impetus for the Study

• Growing use of Internet-based distance education

• How do benchmarks for distance education apply to Internet-based classes?

• Questions arising from The Institute’s What’s the Difference? Report

• Build a foundation for future research

Methodology

• Three Phases– Literature review

• Determine previously identified benchmarks (45)

– Institutional visit• Institutions had to have experience in distance

education; be recognized as leaders; be regionally accredited; and offer more than one program

– Survey of faculty, staff, and students• Likert scale rating presence and importance

Participating Institutions

• Brevard Community College (FL)

• Regents College (NY)

• University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

• University of Maryland University College

• Utah State University

• Weber State University (UT)

Some Key Findings

• Policies often followed practice

• Faculty teaching distance classes were usually volunteers and highly regarded by their peers (“work with the willing”)

• Interactivity is essential to quality

• Class size need not be addressed at this time—more research is needed

Non-Essential Benchmarks

• Professional incentives and institutional rewards are present for faculty

• Courses require collaboration and group work

• Courses should be broken into modules

• Specific time expectations are set for faculty and students

New Benchmarks

• The technology used is as failsafe as possible• There are agreed upon expectations between

faculty and students regarding times for student assignment completion and faculty response

• Questions directed to student service personnel are answered accurately and quickly

Teaching/Learning Benchmarks

• Student interaction with faculty and other students is an essential characteristic and is facilitated through a variety of ways.

• Feedback to student assignments and questions is constructive and timely.

• Students are instructed in the proper methods of effective research, including assessment of resource validity.

Student Support Benchmarks

• Information is supplied to the student about the program.

• Students provided with hands-on training and information to aid them in using electronic databases, interlibrary loans, Gov’t. archives, news services, etc.

• Easily accessible technical assistance• Questions to student service personnel must be

answered accurately and quickly.

Faculty Support Benchmarks• Technical assistance in course development• Assistance with the transition from

classroom teaching to on-line instruction• Instructor training and assistance continues

through the progress of the online course• Faculty members are provided with written

resources to deal with issues arising from student use of electronically accessed data.

Final List of Benchmarks• Institutional Support

– Documented technology planning– Technology used is as failsafe as possible– Centralized support system is in place

• Course Development– Standards for development exist– Instructional materials reviewed– Course design encompasses critical thinking

skills• Teaching/Learning

– Interaction is essential and facilitated through a variety of ways

– Feedback is constructive and timely– Students are instructed on proper methods of

research• Course Structure

– Students advised about the rigor of online classes

– Students receive supplemental course information

– Library resources are available– Response times are agreed upon

• Student Support– Students provided with course information– Students receive hands-on training– Technical assistance available– Quick response to questions and

complaints

• Evaluation and Assessment– Courses subjected to an evaluation process– Data on enrollment, cost, etc. used in

evaluation– Intended outcomes are regularly reviewed

• Faculty Support– Technical assistance available– Assistance provided when transitioning

from the classroom– Assistance continues throughout the class– Provided with written resources

Survey of Traditional and Distance Learning Higher

Education Members

The National Education Association

Published, June 2000Free Copy, http://www.nea.org/he/abouthe/dlstudy.pdf

What do the faculty think?• NEA conducted a phone survey of NEA members

who teach distance learning courses.• Phone interviews with 402 distance learning

faculty between February and March 2000• Defined as a course in which more than have of

the instructs takes place with faculty and students in different locations and delivered through technology

Course Development Benchmarks

• DL faculty teaching internet based courses believe that their DL courses do a better job than traditional courses in meeting goals:– giving students access to information

– providing students with high quality materials

– helping students master the subject matter

– assessing the education effectiveness of the course

– addressing various learning styles

DL faculty rate their courses

• Faculty teaching Internet-based courses give the same ratings as their traditional course on meeting two goals:– improving quantitative skills

– developing student interactivity

• Worse ratings than traditional courses on:– strengthening group problem-solving skills

– improving verbal skills

– developing better oral presentations

Teaching Learning Benchmarks• Student interaction with faculty and other students

– Virtually all of the faculty teaching DL use interactive technology - 2% reported relying exclusively on one-way video.

– Almost all DL faculty have some type of one-on-one interaction outside of class time (96%)

– E-mail is the dominant method - 83% report using e-mail to communicate with students once a week or more.

Course Structure and Student Support Benchmarks

• Faculty teaching internet-based courses rate the library and laboratory facilities available to them and students as excellent or good (81%).

• Almost 80% rated the technical support as good or excellent. Technical support is significantly important to overall feelings about DL

Faculty Support Benchmarks

• Large numbers of faculty teaching Internet-based courses report that workshops and training sessions were available on a regular basis (80%); and large numbers have participated in training (75%).

• Among faculty who design the content of the DL courses, only 26% receive professional assistance.

Evaluation/Assessment Benchmarks

• Most distance learning courses (80%) are approved through the normal curriculum review process.

• The faculty members teaching in DL courses are less likely to be evaluated by their peers or by the administration than faculty teaching in traditional courses

"In the computer industry, there are three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies, and benchmarks." A benchmark may attempt to indicate the overall power of a system by including a "typical" mixture of programs or it may attempt to measure more specific aspects of performance...The most useful kind of benchmark is one which is tailored to a user's own typical tasks. While no one benchmark can fully characterize overall system performance, the results of a variety of realistic benchmarks can give valuable insight into expected real performance. Benchmarks should be carefully interpreted, you should know exactly which benchmark was run (name, version); exactly what configuration was it run on (CPU, memory, compiler options, single user/multi-user, peripherals, network); how does the benchmark relate to your workload?

(1999-10-12) Source:

The Free On-line Dictionary of Computing, © 1993-2000 Denis Howe

Benchmarks ? ? ?