11
This article was downloaded by: [University of North Texas] On: 09 October 2014, At: 18:05 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK Gerontology & Geriatrics Education Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wgge20 Teaching and Learning Experiences in a Collaborative Distance-Education Environment Peter Martin a & Laura Temple Scheetz a a Gerontology Program , Iowa State University , Ames, Iowa, USA Published online: 16 Aug 2011. To cite this article: Peter Martin & Laura Temple Scheetz (2011) Teaching and Learning Experiences in a Collaborative Distance-Education Environment, Gerontology & Geriatrics Education, 32:3, 215-224, DOI: 10.1080/02701960.2011.598976 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02701960.2011.598976 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms- and-conditions

Teaching and Learning Experiences in a Collaborative Distance-Education Environment

  • Upload
    laura

  • View
    214

  • Download
    2

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Teaching and Learning Experiences in a Collaborative Distance-Education Environment

This article was downloaded by: [University of North Texas]On: 09 October 2014, At: 18:05Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Gerontology & Geriatrics EducationPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wgge20

Teaching and Learning Experiencesin a Collaborative Distance-EducationEnvironmentPeter Martin a & Laura Temple Scheetz aa Gerontology Program , Iowa State University , Ames, Iowa, USAPublished online: 16 Aug 2011.

To cite this article: Peter Martin & Laura Temple Scheetz (2011) Teaching and Learning Experiences ina Collaborative Distance-Education Environment, Gerontology & Geriatrics Education, 32:3, 215-224,DOI: 10.1080/02701960.2011.598976

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02701960.2011.598976

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Page 2: Teaching and Learning Experiences in a Collaborative Distance-Education Environment

Gerontology & Geriatrics Education, 32:215–224, 2011Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLCISSN: 0270-1960 print/1545-3847 onlineDOI: 10.1080/02701960.2011.598976

Teaching and Learning Experiencesin a Collaborative Distance-Education

Environment

PETER MARTIN and LAURA TEMPLE SCHEETZGerontology Program, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa, USA

The Great Plains Distance Education Alliance (Great Plains IDEA)emphasizes the importance of a collaborative environment forinstructors and students in distance education. The authors high-light a number of important principles for distance-education pro-grams and point out similarities and differences when comparedto traditional face-face-to classes such as communication, class-room management, connectivity, and technical challenges. Theysummarize general topics concerning the faculty, the syllabus,office hours, the calendar, and announcements. Three essentiallesson components are noted: an overview, the lesson itself, andsupplemanetary material. The authors also take the student per-spective, emphasizing the diversity of students, the importance ofcomputer proficiency, and student interactions. Finally, they sum-marize a first round of course evaluations in the Great Plains IDEAgerontology master’s program.

KEYWORDS distance education, curriculum, collaborativeteaching

Teaching experiences often are solitary experiences for instructors. Coursesare planned and delivered by the instructor alone and rarely discussed withor evaluated by other faculty. The Great Plains Distance Education Alliance(Great Plains IDEA) is a consortium of Colleges of Human Sciences rangingacross the central part of the United States designed to create and modelinterinstitutional collaboration in distance education and develop qualityonline graduate programming (Sanders, 2011). Teaching experiences among

Address correspondence to Peter Martin, Gerontology Program, Iowa State University,1096 Le Baron Hall, Ames, IA 50011, USA. E-mail: [email protected]

215

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

orth

Tex

as]

at 1

8:05

09

Oct

ober

201

4

Page 3: Teaching and Learning Experiences in a Collaborative Distance-Education Environment

216 P. Martin and L. Temple Scheetz

faculty of the Great Plains IDEA are shared, and the curriculum and teachingcomponents are developed conjointly across the alliance.

Student learning experiences often mirror those of the faculty. Studentsattend classes on their own, study on their own, and rarely interact withfellow students. Distance-education courses may make students feel moreisolated (Rangecroft, 1998) because students have fewer connections toeach other when compared to students attending class in traditional settings(Piercy, 2000). However, distance-education instructors can foster studentparticipation by early personal introductions and sharing of course expecta-tions, career interests, reasons for taking the course, and sharing of personalinterests (Piercy, 2000).

As others have pointed out (e.g., Bullen, 1999), more emphasis shouldbe placed on evaluating entire distance-education programs offered byacademic institutions rather than simply evaluating individual courses. Forexample, the Georgia model for collaborative distance education in geron-tology outlines partnership courses offered by participating universitiesin the Georgia system (Malone, Schmidt, & Poon, 1998). These univer-sities share courses covering a general survey of gerontology, biology ofaging, psychology of aging, and sociology of aging courses. Similarly, thefaculty in the Great Plains gerontology program developed a specific cur-riculum for students in the program (Sanders, 2011). The purpose of thisarticle is to highlight faculty and student perspectives from a successfuldistance-education program in gerontology.

GENERAL PRINCIPLES

A good starting principle for distance-education programs is the assumptionthat the same course expectations and components considered in on-campusclasses should also apply to distance-education classes (Swartz & Biggs,1999). If students write papers on campus, so should students at a distance.If students give presentations in class, so can students at a distance. If stu-dents have access to instructors whenever they are in their office, so shouldstudents at a distance. It is important to hold up the same general principlesregardless of where students are or what program they are involved in sothat students understand we strive for excellence in any mode of instructionand learning. Majeski and Stover (2007) noted that all essential elements oflearning can be incorporated in online courses if these courses are carefullystructured and organized.

Bullen (1999) indicated that faculty roles will deal with not only con-tent but also with the learning process itself and the implementation of thisprocess. He also pointed out that technology is not as important a factor asthe focus on learning tasks, learner characteristics, and student motivation.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

orth

Tex

as]

at 1

8:05

09

Oct

ober

201

4

Page 4: Teaching and Learning Experiences in a Collaborative Distance-Education Environment

Teaching and Learning Experiences 217

Even though there may be important similarities between distance-education and online classes, there are also differences. The differencesinclude lack of nonverbal communication, “classroom” management, lackof connectivity, and technical problems (Swartz & Biggs, 1999). Facultyneed to be more explicit and detailed in their instructions to students (e.g.,more information included in syllabi). The face-to-face contact in traditionalsettings is more likely to be in “real time,” and responses can be morespontaneous. Instructors can “read” their students’ reactions immediately andadjust their level and mode of instruction. Instructors of distance-educationclasses may feel more isolated from their students, and the lack of physicalproximity may reduce the spontaneity of instruction (Swartz & Biggs, 1999).On the other hand, students and teachers in a distance-education environ-ment are often more thoughtful in their reaction to each other, becausecommunication does not include nonverbal cues.

THE FACULTY

One of the important features of the Great Plains IDEA is the collabora-tion between member universities. Malone et al. (1998) pointed out thatdistance education in gerontology has increased in part because of short-ages of faculty trained in gerontology and the need to attract a larger, morediverse student body. Bates (2005) noted that collaboration avoids dupli-cation of courses allowing course expenses to be shared and providingmultiple supports from local sources.

What do faculty members from different institutions collaborate on?First, developing a common curriculum signifies a major collaborative effort.Because each representative from a university reports to his or her own aca-demic unit, only equal partnership is likely to make collaboration succeed.Faculty members decide which campus offers specific courses in aging; andbecause distance education often generates additional financial resources,course assignments could be quite controversial. What binds the faculty fromdifferent institutions is the common goal of a program that no institutionalone could offer.

Even though faculty interactions in distance-education environments aredifferent from those on campus, it should also be noted that faculty mem-bers at the Great Plains IDEA program function much like a regular facultyon campus. There are regular faculty meetings held either at national confer-ences or at rotating member sites, and there are regular phone conferences.Faculty members also decide on a faculty chair and representatives to theoverall board of the alliance. There is regular e-mail communication aboutcurricula, task assignments, and students. Faculty members also serve onstudent committees at other universities.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

orth

Tex

as]

at 1

8:05

09

Oct

ober

201

4

Page 5: Teaching and Learning Experiences in a Collaborative Distance-Education Environment

218 P. Martin and L. Temple Scheetz

In many ways, faculty interaction “at a distance” is more effective thanon-campus interaction, because there are more limited opportunities tointeract with each other. All faculty members representing their universitieshave much at stake when discussing their individual programs and becausemeeting times are limited, agenda items are highly relevant and meetingsthemselves efficient. Because all faculty members share their professionalbackground (all are leading gerontologists on their campus) there is a closeprofessional affiliation with faculty members from different campuses.

Betz (2008) pointed out the importance of innovative, cross-cutting rela-tionships between universities in providing the full spectrum of information,perspectives, insights, and research. A collaborative approach to distance-education models requires an openness to sharing new ideas and work thatis often reviewed, criticized, and revised by colleagues across campus sites(Malone et al., 1998; Moore, 1993). Malone et al. (1998) also indicated that aprimary purpose of the partnership is to not only promote collaboration butalso to increase the quality and comprehensiveness of instruction in geron-tology across universities and colleges. Increasing the quality of gerontologyeducation would emphasize the importance of a more comprehensive cur-riculum that includes gerontology specialists from all gerontology-relevantdisciplines.

One of the collaborative tasks instructors from different institutionsundertake is to design the course syllabus.

THE SYLLABUS

An effective distance-education class begins with a detailed and compre-hensive syllabus. A syllabus is critical to any course, but an online syllabusneeds to be more detailed and comprehensive than the syllabus for a face-to-face course (Majeski & Stover, 2007; Renold, 2000). Course logistics need tobe well thought out and spelled out for students so that they know what toexpect. In particular, students should know how to best contact an instructor,when they can expect an answer, and when an instructor is not reachable.Students should also know what expectations instructors have about theirDiscussion Board involvement and how assignments are graded. Syllabi aresent to students before the beginning of the first class and with a “welcomeletter.” Majeski and Stover (2007) echoed this suggestion. All faculty mem-bers in the Great Plains IDEA program have access to each others’ syllabito assess class content. Faculty can then fine-tune their own syllabus givenwhat is taught in other classes.

The syllabus alone cannot clarify all issues students feel confrontedwith. It is therefore important to keep an “open door” policy by offeringoffice hours. The next section details the basic function of office hours indistance-education classes.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

orth

Tex

as]

at 1

8:05

09

Oct

ober

201

4

Page 6: Teaching and Learning Experiences in a Collaborative Distance-Education Environment

Teaching and Learning Experiences 219

OFFICE HOURS

Because students learn at a distance, in a collaborative environment it isessential that they know when an instructor is available. Majeski and Stover(2007) suggested offering a mechanism by which students can share theircourse-related questions and concerns. Virtual office hours (e.g., in a chatroom) work as well as on-campus office hours. Even though students maynot visit during office hours in great numbers (as is true for on-campusstudents), those students who touch base during office hours are glad theyhad a chance to talk with the instructor.

CALENDAR AND ANNOUNCEMENTS

The calendar function is very useful to remind students when assignmentsare due. Online calendars can also be used to require students to sign upfor class assignments. Class presentations can easily be spread out over theentire semester by informing students that no more than one or two studentscan present in any given week. The calendar will note who the first studentsare to sign up.

Regular announcements provide students with reminders of courseassignments and guidelines for studying course material (Majeski & Stover,2007). Announcements may include messages about discussion leaders orabout any particular question that may have come up during the week. Thisis an effective way to communicate with the entire class about occurringproblems or issues.

LESSONS

Piercy (2000) encouraged instructors to consider how to obtain and holdstudent attention as it is critical to the method of preparation and teach-ing in a distance-education format. We suggest to divide lessons into threeessential components: an “overview file,” a “lesson” file, and an “additionalmaterial” file. The overview file provides a summary of all the tasks thatneed to be done during a given week. This may include reading assign-ments, discussion tasks, or viewing class presentations. Students can also beassigned to visit professional Websites (e.g., the National Institutes of Health,www.nih.gov and The Gerontological Society of America, www.geron.org),and Websites of well-known scientists in the field can serve as “field visit”sites. Rather than simply reiterating the material, instructors may want toprovide commentary on the material (e.g., “the authors appear to focuson . . . but neglect the discussion of . . .”). When presenting these lessons,instructors could strive to “hold a conversation” about the material and mayask questions (e.g., “What do you think about . . . ?”) to be addressed in the

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

orth

Tex

as]

at 1

8:05

09

Oct

ober

201

4

Page 7: Teaching and Learning Experiences in a Collaborative Distance-Education Environment

220 P. Martin and L. Temple Scheetz

discussion groups. Finally, the file containing additional material brings inother findings, results, statistics, and topics that may not be covered in thetextbook encouraging a conversation about this material.

Faculty members teaching distance-education classes do not only havepositive experiences; distance education also leads to a number of frustra-tions. These frustrations include the somewhat more impersonal contact tostudents and not directly delivering course material in “real time.” In short,the audience is not immediately present. Although discussions can be quiteinvolving in a distance-education setting, they are often less spontaneousthan they would be in a classroom setting. The direct contact to students isperhaps the most important shortcoming in distance-education classes.

Because many different types of students participate in distance-education classes, one of the challenges is to teach “across disciplines.”Many of the students already work in the field, but students employed asnurses have different needs than students employed in retail. Of course, stu-dents from varying backgrounds also enrich classes by sharing their uniqueprofessional background with others.

THE STUDENTS

Instructors should focus on the special situations of students in gerontol-ogy and realize that they are from many walks and disciplines and are notclustered around universities (Malone et al., 1998). Previous research on stu-dent profiles in distance-education has emphasized a number of importantstudent characteristics (Burrow & Glass, 2001). These characteristics includeaspects of learner self-efficacy (Hill, Smith, & Mann, 1987), computer experi-ence (Stephenson, 1992), maturity and learning style (Brudenell & Carpenter,1990), and fear of technology (Harris & Grandgenett, 1996). Some of thesestudent characteristics will be less relevant for future generations of distancelearners.

Because distance-education students in gerontology are often employedin various settings, their characteristics are also different. In the Great PlainsIDEA gerontology program students range from nursing home administra-tors to activity directors, lobbyists, and students who finished their bachelor’sdegree with little job experience. Depending on the degree of experiencestudents may feel more or less inadequate when they compare themselves toother students. Those students who choose gerontology as a “second career”may not have kept up with technological changes and feel particularlychallenged.

According to Sahin and Shelley (2008), it is imperative that studentsdemonstrate proficiency with computer skills prior to the beginning of thecourse. Those not proficient should be provided with a program to bringthem up to the desired level of competency. One of the first tasks students

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

orth

Tex

as]

at 1

8:05

09

Oct

ober

201

4

Page 8: Teaching and Learning Experiences in a Collaborative Distance-Education Environment

Teaching and Learning Experiences 221

should be involved in is an online training session. In these sessions studentslearn how to access files, manage assignments, and confirm whether theirbrowser is set up correctly. By engaging students from the beginning in thetechnology of the course delivery, instructors do not need to spend timeexplaining technical aspects of the course. A lot of time could be lost just byaddressing individual browser problems or the organization of a Website. Inthese practice sessions, students have to solve a number of tasks that leadthem to a final Web destination. This final task indicates to them (and theinstructor) that they have mastered the task.

Students are also asked to introduce themselves. They should write abrief statement about themselves and are encouraged to post a picture thatwill be placed in an “Introduction” folder.

One of the strengths of distance-education classes is the high level ofinteraction it allows. Students interact on discussion boards, in cyber cafes,and through assignments. Students can also serve as peer reviewers, givingeach other feedback on their projects. All papers and presentations can beshared online . Finally, students may share their own professional experi-ences they bring into the classroom. All these student learning experiencesenhance not only the education of the students who are directly involvedbut also the education of other students.

An important task for students in distance-education classes is toprepare a class presentation. Students can be asked to give PowerPoint pre-sentations just like they would do on campus. However, the emphasis in anonline presentation is on self-containment—all the material must be under-stood without additional sources or additional interpretation. Simply postingPowerPoint presentations to share with others is typically not sufficient.Therefore, it may be helpful for students to post questions and commentson the discussion board. The discussion board is open for a designatedtime (e.g., week) to stimulate interchange of ideas. Group presentations canbe held similarly in that group members take on different sections of apresentation.

Student papers (or project reports) may be submitted in drafts. Studentsstart with an abstract describing the objectives of the paper or project.Second, they may work on the literature review, and finally they present themethods, findings, and discussions of their work. All these components areposted for everybody to see. This often has the effect that students comparethemselves to the best projects thereby improving the overall quality in class.

One of the major features of any distance-education class includes activ-ities in discussion groups. Discussion groups can be handled in differentways. Discussion leaders can be assigned each week for each group, andthe discussion leader has to come up with questions to be addressed. Theleader will also keep the discussion flowing. Instructors can decide to whatextent they want to get involved in the discussion. Discussion leaders canalso be asked to provide a summary after the week’s discussion. Sometimes

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

orth

Tex

as]

at 1

8:05

09

Oct

ober

201

4

Page 9: Teaching and Learning Experiences in a Collaborative Distance-Education Environment

222 P. Martin and L. Temple Scheetz

students from other groups (who can only see the summary and not thediscussion) begin a discussion after the summary statement.

Finally, students can interact with each other in a “cyber café.” The cafécould be a simple discussion link allowing students to ask other studentsquestions about the course or about other courses they are taking, andoften the more experienced students will help less experienced ones whenlearning Web procedures. This is a popular class feature because studentsoften feel more comfortable asking fellow students about specific problemsrather than getting in touch with the instructor.

THE COURSE EVALUATION

Just like we expect course evaluations for our on-campus classes, we con-duct course evaluations for our distance-education classes. Piercy’s (2000)study stressed the importance of conducting research on the effectiveness ofgerontology distance education. Students are invited toward the end of thesemester to evaluate the instructor, the overall course, and other standardaspects of the course. The evaluation is conducted by an outside person(e.g., Webmaster), and the results are not available until after grades havebeen assigned.

Although course evaluations in our program have been very favorable,students have also indicated a number of frustrations. These frustrationsinclude questions about the availability of faculty members, how to reachthem, expectations of courses and delivery of material. Our first programevaluation included the following comments by students: “Having beenphysically disconnected from [the university], I have a great degree thathasn’t brought me any networking opportunities.”

Other comments from students primarily addressed the shortcoming ofspecific classes:

I am also finding that I am not knowledgeable about the legal aspectsof being in charge of peoples’ housing (as a LTC Admin, for example),different aging policies and government programs, information systemsin health care, law and ethics (especially law) in health care, etc. I didreally enjoy the program, but an internship and a few classes in theabove-mentioned areas would’ve really enhanced my knowledge baseof the LTC field.

Finally, distance-education students indicated that they are disadvantagedwhen it comes to graduate assistantships:

The only thing I would have preferred was to be able to obtain an assis-tantship while attending through GPIDEA. I was told numerous times Iwas not eligible. I feel like I may have missed out on opportunities toexperience the research part of the field.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

orth

Tex

as]

at 1

8:05

09

Oct

ober

201

4

Page 10: Teaching and Learning Experiences in a Collaborative Distance-Education Environment

Teaching and Learning Experiences 223

CONCLUSIONS

Teaching experiences in a distance-education environment are extremelyvaluable and add insight into how to deliver teaching modules, ways tolearn about effective interactions between instructors and distance-educationstudents, and to learn about a different type (typically professional) stu-dents who could not take a course or engage in a degree program withoutopportunities to sign up for distance-education experiences. As Majeski andStover (2007) pointed out, distance education has the potential for educat-ing professionals in ways that allow them to effectively identify and addresscomplex gerontological issues. Students share their daily professional expe-riences because many of them are already employed in gerontology settings.As others have pointed out (Shenk, Moore, & Davis, 2004), class discussionsand interactions are often strengthened by the exchange of knowledge anddifferent perspectives brought in by professional and personal experiences.As an instructor, the management of a course is as important as the contentposted on a given Website.

When developing and conducting distance-education programs, collab-oration among faculty members is perhaps the most important componentof a program that reaches across university borders. In addition, instruc-tors need to take special care to develop a clear syllabus and must bespecific in their expectations and assignments. Lessons reach out best to stu-dents if they have a straightforward and consistent structure. Furthermore,distance-education programs in gerontology need to be aware of the var-ied interdisciplinary pool of students. Fostering collaborative interactionamong the students is as important as it is among faculty. Finally, an effec-tive course evaluation will guide faculty members and program directors todesign and maintain the best possible teaching and learning experience in adistance-education environment.

It would not be worth it to teach distance-education courses ifinstructors had to compromise the quality of instruction. Although distance-education classes cannot deliver the same material in the same way thaton-campus classes do, they also have significant strengths that should notbe overlooked. Offering classes to students who could not attend collegeotherwise and making good use of technological (Web-based) skills areonly a few of these advantages that allow students and faculty to interactin innovative, collaborative ways.

REFERENCES

Bates, A. W. (2005). Technology, E-learning, and distance education. New York,NY: Routledge.

Betz, D. (2008). International education and strategic partnerships—A key to suc-cess. In A. Y. Al-Hawaj, W. Elali, & E. H. Twizell (Eds.), Higher education in the21st century: Issues and challenges (pp. 3–8). London, UK: Taylor & Francis.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

orth

Tex

as]

at 1

8:05

09

Oct

ober

201

4

Page 11: Teaching and Learning Experiences in a Collaborative Distance-Education Environment

224 P. Martin and L. Temple Scheetz

Brudenell, I., & Carpenter, C. (1990). Adult learning styles and attitudes towardcomputer-assisted instruction. Journal of Nursing Education, 29, 79–83.

Bullen, M. (1999). What’s the difference: A review of contemporary research onthe effectiveness of distance learning in higher education. Journal of DistanceEducation, 14, 102–114.

Burrow, J. L., & Glass, J. C. (2001). Teaching gerontology through distanceeducation: What we have learned. Educational Gerontology, 27 , 681–695.

Harris, T., & Grandgenett, N. (1996). Correlates among teachers’ anxieties, demo-graphics, and telecomputing activity. Journal of Research on Computing inEducation, 28, 300–317.

Hill, T., Smith, N., & Mann, M. (1987). Role of efficacy expectations in predictingthe decision to use advance technologies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72,307–313.

Majeski, R., & Stover, M. (2007). Theoretically based pedagogical strategies lead-ing to deep learning in asynchronous online gerontology courses. EducationalGerontology, 33, 171–185. doi:10.1080/03601270600850826

Malone, D. M., Schmidt, M. S., & Poon, L. W. (1998). The distance learning part-nership in gerontology: The Georgia model for gerontology higher education.Educational Gerontology, 24, 247–264. doi:10.1080/0360127980240305

Moore, M. G. (1993). Is teaching like flying? A total systems view of distanceeducation. American Journal of Distance Education, 7 , 1–10.

Piercy, K. W. (2000). Teaching gerontology via distance education: Variety isthe key to success. Educational Gerontology, 26 , 665–675. doi:10.1080/

03601270050200653Rangecroft, M. (1998). Interpersonal communication in distance education. Journal

of Education for Teaching, 24, 75–76. doi:10.1080/02607479819944Renold, C. (2000). Creating an online gerontology course: A bottom-up approach.

Gerontology & Geriatrics Education, 20, 17–30. doi:10.1300/J021v20n04_04Sahin, I., & Shelley, M. (2008). Considering students’ perceptions: The distance

education student satisfaction model. Educational Technology & Society, 11,216–223.

Sanders, G. F. (2011). The Great Plains IDEA gerontology program: An online,interinstitutional graduate degree. Gerontology & Geriatrics Education, 32,233–244.

Shenk, D., Moore, L., & Davis, B. (2004). Teaching an interdisciplinary distanceeducation gerontology course: Benefits of diversity. Educational Gerontology,30, 219–235. doi:10.1080/03601270490273141

Stephenson, S. D. (1992). The effects of student-instructor interaction andpaired/individual study on achievement in computer-based training. Journal ofComputer-Based Instruction, 19, 22–26. doi:10.2190/CPEV-KWL8-LQ86-8QUF

Swartz, J. D., & Biggs, B. (1999). Technology, time, and space or what does it meanto be present? A study of the culture of a distance education class. Journal ofEducational Computing Research, 20, 71–85.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

orth

Tex

as]

at 1

8:05

09

Oct

ober

201

4