Teaching and Learning in Distance Education in the 21st Century:
An Overview of Policies, Trends, Issues and Challenges in the Australian Context Dr Trish Andrews
1
DEHub Monograph Series No 1 2013
DEHub Innovation in distance education University of New England NSW 2351 Australia
Enquiries may be sought directly from DEHub innovation in distance education: Email: dehub@une.edu.au World wide web: http://dehub.edu.au/resources/monograph-series/
First Series Edition 2013
National Library of Australia in Publication Data A catalogue record of this monograph series is available from the National Library of Australia ISSN: 1838-9414 ISBN: 978-1-921597-32-9
Series editor: Dr Rosalind James (Director DEHub) Edition copyeditor: Dr Miriam Verbeek Cover design and layout: Kate Fitzgerald
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Writing and production of this publication has been funded by the Australian Government Department of Industry, Innovation, Science, Research and Tertiary Education (DIISRTE) through the DEHub Project. The views expressed in this report do not necessarily reflect the views of the DEHub, the Australian Government or DIISRTE.
2
Copyright © DEHub, University of New England With the exception of the Commonwealth Coat of Arms, all logos, any material owned by a third party, protected by a trademark or where otherwise noted, all material presented in this document is published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercialShareAlike 3.0 Australia (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0) Australia License (http://creativecommons. org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/au/). Excluded material owned by third parties may include, for example, design and layout, images or video that we have obtained under license from third parties, or where we link via URL to material on external, third-party sites. We have made all reasonable efforts to identify and label material owned by third parties.
Under this license, you are free to share (to copy, distribute and transmit the work), to remix (to adapt the work) and build upon the work non-commercially, under the following conditions: You must attribute the DEHub, University of New England, as the copyright holder of the work in compliance with our attribution policy outlined below. You use this work with the understanding that: • Waiver—Any of the above conditions can be waived if you get permission from the copyright holder. • Public Domain—Where the work or any of its elements is in the public domain under applicable law, that status is in no way affected by the license. • Other Rights—In no way are any of the following rights affected by the license: — Your fair dealing or fair use rights, or other applicable copyright exceptions and limitations;
— The author’s moral rights;
— Rights other persons may have either in the work itself or in how the work is used, such as publicity or privacy rights. • Notice—For any reuse or distribution, you must make clear to others the license terms of this work. The best way to do this is with a link to the following web page: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/au/ To view a copy of the legal code for this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ by-nc-sa/3.0/au/legalcode or send a letter to: Creative Commons, 171 Second St, Suite 300, San Francisco, CA 94105, USA.
33
ATTRIBUTION POLICY Under the terms of this license, you are required to attribute the DEHub, University of New England in a form specified by this policy. However, you may not attribute the DEHub, University of New England in a way that would create an impression that the DEHub, University of New England endorses you, your organisation, your work or your use of this work.
Unmodified material Where you are distributing or using material ‘as is’ and have not modified the material in any way, shape or form, you must attribute the DEHub, University of New England by citing this publication in the following way: Source: Andrews, T. (2013). Teaching and Learning in Distance Education in the 21st century: an overview of policies, trends, issues and challenges in the Australian contex. Monograph No. 4, DEHub Monograph Series No 1. Armidale, NSW, Australia: University of New England, DEHub. Available from http://dehub.edu. au/resources/monograph-series/
Modified material Where you have modified, transformed or created derivative works based upon the DEHub, University of New England material (such as, for example, creating graphs or charts or presentations based on data/text from this publication) you must attribute the DEHub, University of New England by citing this publication in the following way: Based on material from Andrews, T. (2013). Teaching and Learning in Distance Education in the 21st century: an overview of policies, trends, issues and challenges in the Australian context. Monograph No. 4, DEHub Monograph Series No 1. Armidale, NSW, Australia: University of New England, DEHub. Available from http://dehub.edu.au/ resources/monograph-series/ and include the following statement/acknowledgement: Support for the original work was provided by the Australian Government Department of Industry, Innovation, Science, Research and Tertiary Education (DIISRTE) through the DEHub Project.
4
DEHub Monograph Series No 1
Issues in distance and flexible learning
5
DISTANCE EDUCATION HUB (DEHub) MONOGRAPH SERIES 2013 Series Editor: Rosalind James
Other Titles in Series:
No. 1
Realising the Full Socio-Economic promise of the National Broadband
Network in Preparing all regions of Australia for participation in the
Digital Economy
Dr Marcus Bowles
No. 2
Higher Education Capacity Building: Looking to the Future
Cherry Stewart
No. 3
Social Media Enabled Learning and the Curriculim in
Australian Higher Education: A Literature Review
Nicole Green, Brenda Wolodko, Ros Foskey and Margaret Brooks
No. 5
Internationalisation and Globalisation of Higher Education:
Implications for Africa’s Higher Education System
6
Associate Professor Bernice Kotey, Dessalegn Mihret
About this monograph series The DEHub Monograph Series No 1 Issues in distance and flexible learning is published as a deliverable under Diversity and Structural Adjustment Funding from the Department of Industry, Innovation, Science, Research and Tertiary Education (DIISRTE). The aim of the monograph series is to promote the publication of research in the fields of distance and online learning and facilitate researchers and practitioners from many disciplines across the higher education sector, nationally and internationally, sharing their data, techniques, research methods, findings and ideas. This Monograph Series endeavours to be a professional publication that educational practitioners and researchers can use as a vehicle to extend and share knowledge, improve dissemination of research and practice, and stimulate discussion in the field of distance and online learning and other related areas. To ensure a professional approach, all submissions undergo double blind peer review.
About the DEHub DEHub (University of New England) http://dehub.edu.au/
DEHub, based at the University of New England (UNE), was established in 2009 as a Federally-funded central agency for distance education research. It aims to promote knowledge transfer about best practice in distance education and support national and global collaborations on evidence-based approaches to effectively and efficiently employing new technologies in distance education. DEHub works to inform and influence policy and improve practice based on research outcomes, both nationally and internationally. DEHub has fostered an extensive, worldwide network of researchers in online and distance education so as to be able to facilitate connections between educators and other stakeholders in higher education.
7
DEHub Monograph Series
Series 1 No 4
Teaching and Learning in Distance Education in the 21st Century:
An Overview of Policies, Trends, Issues and Challenges in the Australian Context
Dr Trish Andrews
8
About the Author
Trish has worked as a lecturer in higher education for more than 15 years. She has considerable experience in the areas of open, distance, flexible and blended learning and has a strong background in research and development relating to new and emerging learning environments. She has extensive experience in supporting innovative curriculum development with a particular focus on integrating technologies into higher education programs. Trish has had many successfully completed and current grants from local, national and international granting agencies. Current grants include an ALTC leadership grant exploring rich media and an ALTC priority projects grant developing a comprehensive evaluation model for learning spaces.
Keywords: higher education, distance education, online learning, e-learning, online pedagogy, quality assurance, distance learners, student voice, information and communications technology, ICT, open source, learning spaces, open learning, mobile learning
9
Table of Contents Abstract ...........................................................................................................................................12 Introduction .....................................................................................................................................13 A working definition of distance education ...................................................................................13 Teaching and learning in distance education ...............................................................................15 Policies and trend impacting on distance education ...................................................................16
Government focus on increasing participation in higher education .............................16
Growth in institutional adoption of ICTs .........................................................................16
Growth in personal ownership of computing power ......................................................17
Ubiquitous and mobile learning ......................................................................................18
Blurring of the lines between delivery modes ................................................................18
Institutional collaborations ..............................................................................................19
Social inclusions ..............................................................................................................19
Open learning ...................................................................................................................20
Open source tools ............................................................................................................20
Learning spaces ...............................................................................................................21
Issues and challenges ...................................................................................................................22
10
The digital divide ..............................................................................................................22
On campus and distance learners .................................................................................23
Supporting social inclusion through distance education ..............................................24
Quality ...............................................................................................................................25
Curriculim Design ............................................................................................................26
Development of ‘soft skills’ .............................................................................................27
Academic development ...................................................................................................28
Conclusions ....................................................................................................................................29 References .....................................................................................................................................30
11
Abstract
Traditional distance education is undergoing major changes as governments seek to increase higher education enrolments and institutions and individuals make wide use of technologies to support learning This paper discusses a number of issues relating to teaching and learning in distance education and intends to contribute to the ongoing discussion of the role of distance education in meeting the educational needs of nations and their people as they strive to meet the demands and expectations of a rapidly developing global knowledge economy. This is one of a number of papers developed by DEHub in relation to issues in distance education and focuses on policies, trends, issues and challenges related to teaching and learning.
12
Introduction Distance education is a rapidly growing segment of the higher education market both nationally and internationally and an issue of continuing importance to the higher education sector. An IBIS Business report (2009) indicated a 15.9% growth in online learning in the Australian context over the next five years. The growing diversity of students, changing expectations about what constitutes a quality teaching and learning experience and the widespread adoption of technology are all impacting on the sector and will continue to do so into the foreseeable future.
A working definition of distance education Distance education is increasingly becoming a key form of educational delivery in both the developed and the developing world. However, there is considerable variation in the ways distance education is defined and understood (Guri–Rozenblit, 2009). For this paper, distance education, also variously referred to as distance learning, e-learning, online learning, online education or distributed learning (Guri-Rozenblit, 2009), can be simply defined as a system of education delivery in which the majority of learning takes place with the learner and the teacher separated by space and/or time, the gap between the two being bridged by technology. When considering distance education, it is important to draw a distinction between distance learning and distance learners. A distance learner is one who experiences the majority (80+%) of their learning off-campus at a distance from the teacher and other students and consequently has limited face-to-face interaction with their teachers and peers (Allen & Seaman, 2010; 2008). For distance learners, on-campus learning most commonly occurs in the form of residential schools. Distance education can cater for a wide variety of diverse learner needs and is usually characterised by greater flexibility for the learner, convenience of time and place for learning and the ability to work at one’s own pace. As such, distance education requires special techniques of course/unit/lesson structure and design, distinctive instructional techniques and different methods of communication using electronic technologies. Distance education encompasses a wide variety of technology-based teaching and learning approaches including e-learning and mobile learning. Instruction may be synchronous or asynchronous. Learning technologies utilised by distance educators can include:
13
•
print-based media, such as hardcopy study guides or materials supplied on CD’s that can be printed out by students;
•
voice-centred media, such as CD or MP3 recordings, teleconferences, podcasts, webcasts, or voice over IP systems (SKYPE);
•
video platforms, such as instructional videos, DVDs, vodcasts or interactive video-conferencing;
•
web conferencing tools such as Elluminate and Wimba;
•
computer-centred support delivered over the internet or corporate intranet through learning management systems or more interactive Web 2.0 social networking technologies such as blogs, wikis, Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, Flickr, del.icio.us; and/or
•
multimedia systems.
The implementation of distance learning will continue to evolve to incorporate new and emerging technologies. This working definition of distance education informs a range of DEHub research themes/ questions, areas of interest and projects.
14
Teaching and learning in distance education DEHub addresses three main themes relating to distance education. These themes are Teaching and Learning; Community and Research; and Development. The theme of teaching and learning in distance education considers the individuals who provide and use the distance education system/s. Major issues identified include applications of ICT; mobile and ubiquitous learning; learner characteristics; the student voice and users’ experience with distance learning; open learning resources; professional development; learning design for distance learners; and communities of practice and interaction and communication within these learning groups.
These areas of interest particularly focus on social inclusion aspects of the higher education sector including:
15
•
Post-compulsory and professional education for students in rural and remote geographic areas.
•
Higher education pathways, including second chance opportunities.
•
Strategies for maximizing collaborative research in distance learning for staff in regional higher education institutions.
•
Higher education institutions and regional engagement.
•
Higher education and students with disabilities.
Policies and trends impacting on distance education This paper outlines a number of polices and trends that DEHub consider are impacting on the teaching and learning aspects of distance education.
Government focus on increasing participation in higher education The identified need to provide appropriately educated workers with the expertise to support the development of knowledge economies in the 21st century is recognised by Governments as a significant issue in the provision of higher education (Gillard, 2009; Scott, 2009; National Audit Office, 2008; The Sutton Trust, 2008). The Bradley (2009) Review of Higher Education in 2008, a comprehensive analysis of the Australian higher education sector commissioned by the then newly installed Labour Government also recommended the need to rapidly grow student participation in higher education and to improve access to higher education for students from low socio-economic status (SES) backgrounds. Consequently, the Australian Federal Government has declared its intention to increase higher education participation in the 25-35 year old population to 40% by 2020 (Gillard, 2009). Additionally, the Government has set a target of 20% of total enrolments to consist of students from low SES backgrounds by 2020. As these potential students include workers and parents and others who have commitments that preclude full time study, it is anticipated that distance education will play a major role in extending education to this group. The agenda of the Australian Federal Government to increase participation in higher education is reflected in the policies of other national Governments (Gillard, 2009; National Audit Office, 2008). While many aspects need to be addressed to successfully increase participation in higher education generally (Scott, 2009) and social inclusion students in particular, the need for Governments to build capacity for knowledge economies means that increased participation in higher education will be a major driver in the growth of distance education globally well into the 21st century.
Growth in institutional adoption of ICTs Throughout the last two decades there has been considerable advances in computing technologies and computing power resulting in array of powerful ICTs suitable for teaching and learning. Consequently: These new technologies have significantly enlarged the options for creating teaching-learning settings. ‌ The new technologies are doing far more than simply jazzing up the delivery of conventional lectures or lab demonstrations. Indeed, it is no longer necessary for instructors and students to be in the same location at the same time for teaching and learning to occur. Various new technologies have made possible the ‘any where, anytime’ delivery of instruction and student learning (Pascarella & Terenzini, 1998, pp.159 - 160).
16
ICTs play and will continue to play a critical role in the provision of education both on and off campus. The ongoing adoption of ICTs by institutions to support all education and in particular, distance education, is a growing trend in higher education (Allen & Seaman, 2010; 2008). In the Australian context Learning Management Systems such as Blackboard and Moodle and lecture recording systems such as Lectopia (Gosper et al, 2008) are widely utilised across the sector. This trend has significant implications for the ways in which teaching and learning will take place and is changing the face of education (UNESCO, 2009; Oliver, 2005). Institutional adoption of ICT tools such as learning management systems (LMS), lecture recording technologies, rich media technologies such as webconferencing and videoconferencing and social networking tools such as Flickr and de.lici.ous is widespread in developed countries and expanding in developing countries. These technologies allow for considerable flexibility in the ways students access and participate in teaching and learning activities (Gosper et al, 2008; Phillips et al, 2007; Williams & Fardon, 2007; D’Antoni, 2006). As ICT technology is viewed as a key provider of distance learning, the implications for distance education are manifold. The need for high quality distance learning programs that enhance student learning are critical to this provision. Effective integration of ICTs to support a range of educational needs in higher education has significant implications for all aspects of teaching and learning for both staff and students. Amongst other issues, there is considerable diversity in staff and student digital literacy which impacts on the efficiency and effectiveness of use of ICT (Kennedy et al, 2009; Hughes, 2009). It will require significant research and support in the areas of curriculum development, staff development, student support and the teaching and learning experience for both staff and students to ensure that the expectations relating to the use of these technologies are realised.
Growth in personal ownership of computing power Ownership of personal computers and computing power including 3G mobile phones is very high in Australia as well as many developed and developing countries and continuing to grow. Many students in Western countries commonly own at lest three mobile devices – laptops, mobile phones and mp3 players – which are used for a variety of personal, social and educational activities (Andrews et al, 2011, forthcoming). From both an institutional perspective and a student perspective, the continuing decline in the cost of computing power is making computers and computing power increasingly accessible to all students, including those from low-socio-economic backgrounds. The decreasing size and increasing power of computers, including the emergence of the superphone (Gigaom, 2009) and the development of portable tablet technologies such as the Apple ipad is expanding opportunities for applications of ICTs to support a diverse range of learning needs and requirements. Capped phone and data plans providing cost effective access to online tools and resources means that students are not only willing to use their own technologies for teaching and learning activities (Andrews & Smyth, 2010) but expect that they will be an integral part of their teaching and learning participation (Van der Werf & Sabatier, 2009). This broad and increasingly ubiquitous ownership of computing power coupled with increasing expectations relating to their use for teaching and learning activities, is expanding the opportunities for the use of ICTs for a range of educational needs and requirements and creating challenges for institutions to act on these opportunities.
17
Ubiquitous and mobile learning The rapid emergence of portable computing tools with their superior processing power, easy access to internet services, multiple applications, user friendly interfaces and affordable costs (Gigaom, 2009) strongly indicates that the rapid expansion of whole scale personal ownership of high levels of computing power will continue. The push by Governments to provide high-speed, reliable broadband networks is further creating an environment where ubiquitous access to online services will become more commonplace both nationally and internationally. This ownership of mobile computing power and the associated access to online services including online learning is expanding to include the poorest of people in developing countries (Kreutzer, 2009; Donner, 2008; Miller, 2007). Thus, the opportunities suggested by Pascarelli and Terenzini in 1998 for ‘any where, anytime’ learning are being realised. More ubiquitous ownership of and access to these tools is fuelling the integration of mobile technologies into teaching and learning in higher education and it is anticipated that such integration will be widespread by 2020. The implications for distance learning and distance learners are many. In particular, there is need to understand the ways in which mobile devices support mobility of the learner and the ways in which learners can interact and engage with a variety of physical and virtual learning spaces and learning environments.
Blurring of the lines between delivery modes The ongoing expansion of the use of ICTs by higher education institutions for teaching and learning activities along with growing ownership of computers and high levels of computing power by individuals is influencing and promoting the blurring of boundaries between different delivery modes (Guri-Rozenblit, 2009; 2005). The flexibility enabled by these technologies (Pascarella & Terenzini, 1998) allows students to access materials and resources and participate in learning activities in ways that suit their needs and lessen institutions’ reliance on face-to-face delivery for on-campus students (Van der Werf & Sabatier, 2009; Gosper et al, 2008). Expectations relating to learning of students entering higher education are highly influenced by their school experience (Van der Werf & Sabatier, 2009; Hughes, 2009). Curriculum changes currently occurring in schools are resulting in more collaborative, interactive and social approaches to teaching and learning supported by ICTs. This is influencing students’ expectations about what constitutes learning in the higher education context, breaking down concepts of traditional university participation (Hughes, 2009; Van der Werf & Sabatier, 2009). Further, this changing school experience is contributing to new understandings of what constitutes a satisfactory learning experience for students (Hughes, 2009). As a consequence of these changes in school education there is evidence emerging that students are looking for more flexibility in their study programs and making informed decisions in relationship to selecting an institution that includes programs that provide high quality alternatives to traditional lecture and tutorial approaches to teaching and learning (Van der Werf & Sabatier, 2009). The rapidly growing availability of unlimited access to online networks regardless of time and place is further influencing these expectations, enabling increasing ease of access to learning ‘anywhere, anytime, anyhow’ (Ramaprasad, 2009). The need to address expectations in relation to these issues will be a major challenge for higher education institutions in the medium to long term.
18
Institutional collaborations Use of ICTs is also breaking down institutional barriers. Distance learning supported by ICTs is enabling and supporting regional engagement and is crossing national and international borders. Increasing numbers of institutions are turning to cross institutional collaborations supported by ICT to maintain course viability and enrolments particularly in cases where individual institutional numbers can be low and so continue to provide such courses to rural and regional students in particular (Andrews, 2010; Tynan & Smyth, 2007). Such collaborations are also extending to include arrangements with international institutions to provide unique educational access across international borders using a range of ICTs (Stephenson, 2009; Mason, 2006). While international students are participating in on-campus courses in large numbers increasing numbers of these students are participating in a variety of models of ICT supported distance learning programmes (D’Antoni, 2006). Such collaborations are expected to continue and expand as developing nations increase their need for higher education, but lack the internal resources to provide this. From a teaching and learning perspective, these initiatives have major implications for institutions in terms of distance education curriculum design, applications of ICTs and staff and student support to address issues of internationalisation of the curriculum in particular and teaching and learning in general.
Social inclusion In addressing issues of social inclusion a distinction can be drawn between ‘increasing participation’ in higher education– in other words general expansion – and ‘widening participation’ – the positive reduction of barriers to access experienced by students from less privileged social backgrounds (The Sutton Trust, 2008, p.7). Under-representation in higher education by low-socio economic groups and those from rural and remote locations is acknowledged as a challenge by the Australian Federal Government (Gillard, 2009) and more broadly in the developed world (Scott, 2009; The Sutton Trust, 2008; Commonwealth of Learning, 2006). Consequently, the Australian and other Governments have set high social inclusion targets to widen participation in higher education. The Australian Government is focusing attention on the 24-25 year old age group and has stated its intention that 20% of all higher education enrolments will be drawn from low socio-economic areas by 2020 (Gillard, 2009). This agenda of actively widening participation in higher education from social inclusion groups is also reflected in the policies of other developed countries (Scott, 2009). These policies have strong implications for the role of ICT supported distance education in extending educational opportunities to this group, particularly in providing flexibility in accessing and participating in teaching and learning activities (Techdis, 2006). However, it also involves significant challenges for institutions in supporting and retaining individuals within this group to complete educational programs (The Sutton Trust, 2008). Developing and providing appropriate and adequate support structures and programs for social inclusion students will be a significant challenge for institutions. Unfortunately there has been limited success so far in increasing broader participation from social inclusion groups in higher education (The Sutton Trust, 2008; Blandin & Machin, 2004; Yorke & Thomas, 2003). The needs of both on-campus and distance learners from this demographic will need to be adequately addressed if such initiatives are to be successful.
19
Open learning The need to provide education to address millennium goals (http://www.un.org/ millenniumgoals) (Commonwealth of Learning, 2006) has been and continues to be a significant driver in the growth of distance education (Commonwealth of Learning, 2006). Coupled with social inclusion agendas to expand access to higher education to disadvantaged minorities, it is also fuelling growth in open learning. Open learning describes policies and practices that permit entry to learning with no barriers or minimal barriers of age, gender or time while recognising prior learning (Commonwealth of Learning, 2006). Additionally, open learning can relate to openness in relation to accessibility, flexibility and content (Jarvis et al, 2003). This growing interest in openness and open resources will impact on traditional models of educational provision with students having more ability to negotiate entry, exit, timing and content of their courses. This raises questions around the role and relevancy of degrees and what other kinds of educational programmes might better meet the needs of both learners and employers. Apart from the programmes offered through Open Universities Australia, (http://www.open.edu.au/public/home) opportunities for open learning remain fairly limited in the Australian context
In other examples of open learning, over 300 institutions worldwide (Matkin 2009), including highly reputable institutions such as Stanford University in the US and the Open University in the UK, are making their content freely available on the web. Other initiatives such as iTunes U will also support more open access to learning materials. Such initiatives will create new models of educational provision and increase competitiveness in the sector. Institutions will need to be increasingly flexible to respond to the opportunities and threats created by more open learning approaches. In responding to the challenges posed by the growth of open learning institutions, there is a need to explore current and potential models of learning. Importantly, institutions need to identify how such open approaches are viewed by distance learners and how more open understandings in relation to higher education programs might be utilised by institutions to meet distance learners’ needs.
Open source tools The move towards using more open source software and materials in higher education settings is expanding rapidly with many software applications now being suitable for use at an institutional level. As Gacek & Arief (2004), point out, the concept of open source is a complex one and there are many differing interpretations of what comprises open source software. While open source products vary considerably in their characteristics, drawing on the work of the Open Source Initiative (www.opensource.org/docs/definition) Gacek & Arief, (2004) outline three defining characteristics:
•
the ability to distribute software freely
•
the source code’s availability
•
the right to create derived works through modification.
The global domination of the Learning Management System (LMS) Moodle, with 54% of market share, (Zacker.org. n.d.), and the growing acceptability of other open source LMSs such as Sakai, highlight the attractiveness of such tools to the higher education sector. The
20
ability to modify code to meet individual institutional needs is an attractive, although often under-utilised, aspect of open source tools such as Moodle. Increasingly these kinds of tools are also seen as providing more than adequate support and providing better outcomes than commercial software products. From a technical perspective, the choice of Moodle as the OU’s VLE shows how Open Source products can be well capable of competing with proprietary solutions. It was and is seen as the best available solution that would meet the OU’s demands on stability, flexibility, scalability, and also very important: support. (epractice.eu, http://www.epractice.eu/en/ cases/openuniversityuk) Open source development in higher education is highly active. Across the sector open source software applications including a range of web 2.00 tools are increasingly becoming available on line and this trend will continue. Open source software applications are also expanding more widely into other aspects of education such as administration (Courant & Griffith, 2006). Given the rapid take up of many open source software tools by the higher education sector in both the developed and developing worlds, its flexibility in responding to individual institutional needs and lower cost implications, these tools are set to continue to be a significant trend in supporting distance education.
Learning spaces A focus on the development of technology enriched learning spaces (Steel & Andrews, in press) to support the integration of ICT technologies and to foster socio-cultural approaches to teaching and learning has emerged in higher education institutions in recent years (Education. au, 2009). The growth in ubiquitous learning (Ramaprasad 2009), the increasing focus on the development of workplace skills (Trelevan & Voola, 2008), the blending and blurring of modes of learning and the growing mobility of learners indicates that the notion of what constitutes a learning space for distance learners and how learners and teachers will use ICTs to participate in such spaces will continue to be of strong interest in the short to medium term (Long & Erhmann, 2005). The ability to link learning contexts through the use of mobile technologies and the expanding creation of and access to virtual learning spaces will have a significant impact on what is understood as learning space and how people learn within those spaces, for all learning activities including distance learning. Understanding how distance learners create ‘learning landscapes’ consisting of physical and virtual spaces (Thody, 2008) is of particular interest in relationship to the ways in which these learners utilise the range of ‘life spaces’ available to them as learning spaces (Kolb & Kolb, 2005).
21
Issues and challenges The expected rapid growth in distance education over the next decade and the trends outlined above provides both opportunities and challenges for existing distance education providers and those institutions who intend to extend their offerings through distance education programs.
The digital divide The digital divide is an issue of concern to distance education providers and will continue to be so (Hughes). Notwithstanding the increasingly ubiquitous access to computing power through computers, superphones and other mobile phones and devices, there will be large variations in the access that students have to computing power and ICTs (Hughes, 2009). As institutions become increasingly reliant on the use of ICTs to deliver educational activities they will need to consider access including:
•
What ICT access do distance learners have to undertake learning in their workplace and communities (as different from their homes; e.g. community access centres)? What percentage of students use/rely on work or community access?
•
Can distance education provide opportunities for education for socially excluded groups?
However, while the ability to access technology is critical for participation in higher education activities, as Warschauer (2002) cautions, there is also the need to consider the digital divide in broader terms. A framework of technology for social inclusion allows us to re-orient the focus from that of gaps to be overcome by provision of equipment to that of social development to be enhanced through the effective integration of ICT into communities and institutions. This kind of integration can only be achieved by attention to the wide range of physical, digital, human and social resources that meaningful access to ICT entails (p.9-10).
Additionally, Selwyn (2010) raises the issue of the digital divide in relation to what is meant by ICT use and the key role it is increasingly playing in all aspects of daily life: … the worldwide web is now established as a key setting where students access and interact with information. …ICT use is increasingly implicated in what it means to be socially, economically, culturally and politically involved in twenty first century society and twenty first century higher education. (Selwyn 2010 p. 35).
22
Digital literacy is another key aspect of ICT usage in higher education and one which is characterised by a great diversity of skills in both staff and students (Wood & Dodd, 2010; Selwyn, 2010; Kennedy et al, 2009; Fitzgerald & Steel, 2008). While much has been made of the concept that current and emerging generations of young people are digital natives (Oblinger & Oblinger, 2005; Prensky, 2001), the reality is that higher education students do and will continue to demonstrate considerable diversity in relation to digital literacy (Wood & Dodd, 2010; Jones, 2010). Issues of a digital divide also relate to staff. The rapid adoption of ICTS in higher education institution has created a perception by students of a ‘digital divide’ in relation to skills levels of staff (Hughes 2009). Students are increasingly recognising the need for staff to develop skills and understandings in how to effectively use ICT s for teaching and learning (Hughes, 2009; Steel & Fitzgerald 2008). As Oillo points out: … there are new ICT tools, collaborative sites and blogs, platforms like Facebook and Twitter, video conferencing and mobile tools. Young people have already mastered all these new and different techniques but not all teachers (UNESCO, 2009).
While this statement overlooks students’ diversity in regard to ICT skills it acknowledges the need for staff to master new skills and understandings to make effective use of existing and emerging ICT technologies. This highlights the critical importance of developing models and approaches to professional development that will enable staff to develop the necessary skills to use ICT proficiently for teaching and learning in the 21st century.
On campus and distance learners While distance education approaches using ICT will become a norm for the majority focus on supporting the distance learner that characterised earlier models of distance education has been lost (Guri-Rozenblit, 2009). While significant studies have been conducted into the on-campus, first year experience with ICTs in Australia (Kennedy et al, 2009; Fitzgerald & Steel 2008) little is understood about the nature of the learning experience for distance learners. Additionally, several recent studies in the UK, including Jefferies, 2009; Hardy et al. 2009; Conole, 2006; Timmis et al, 2004, have explored the student voice in relation to ICTs in higher education and in the spaces students use for learning (Learning Landscape Project Team, 2008). Investigations into the use of social networking tools such as Facebook (Selwyn, 2009) in higher education have explored the notion of ‘technologies for learning and technologies for living’ and the ways in which students do and don’t like to use their technologies for teaching and learning activities. While these studies have shed significant light on student experiences with technology, their focus has been largely on on-campus students and in particular on blended learning environments, which include a significant face-to-face aspect along with online components. Consequently the distance learner’s voice has been largely overlooked and there has been little understanding of the ways in which distant learners use technology for both formal and informal teaching and learning, the extent to which they are engaged in blended learning or wholly online learning environments and the nature of those environments. Equally, while
23
there been considerable investigation into on campus learning spaces (Radcliffe et al, 2008) in recent times, little is known about the spaces and places in which distance students learn and the ways in which they engage with technology in these spaces. With this group of students set to expand rapidly and significantly as governments seek to meet social inclusion targets in relation to higher education and to expand participation in higher education amongst 24-35 year old working professionals, there is a need to understand the distance learner’s experience of ICTs in higher education and to respond to needs and concerns identified. Some questions include:
•
What technologies do distance students own/have access to?
•
What technologies (including personal technologies are distant students using and what patterns of use can be identified (personal and learning)?
•
What are the spaces and places that distance students learn in and how do they use their technologies in those settings?
•
How do distance students use technology to communicate – how, when, who with & why and for what purpose?
•
How does students’ use of technology change over time?
•
What technologies and applications of technologies would students like to see implemented/ removed/used differently?
Supporting social inclusion through distance education Many attempts by nations to address issues of social inclusion via distance education have been unsuccessful. Retention in distance learning is an identified issue with dropout rates in online courses exceeding 40% in many courses (Patterson & McFadden, 2009). The drop out rate of social inclusion students can be particularly high. Many of these students require additional support to remain and succeed in higher education programs and in many case this support has been lacking. Questions that need to be explored in this regard include:
24
•
What kinds of distance learning programs meet the needs of social inclusion students?
•
What is the role of open learning for social inclusion students? What kind of support to distance learners require to succeed in distance learning programs?
•
What kind of support do social inclusion students require?
•
What mechanisms and approaches need to be put in place to support these needs?
•
Internationalisation
The international student marketing Australia is a significant national industry making a significant contribution to Gross Domestic Product (GDP). However, while internationalisation can bring many benefits there are also challenges in the provision of education programs to an increasingly diverse and internationalised student cohort. Key questions to be investigated include:
•
What social and global developments and ‘fiscal realities’ impact on current distance learning models?
•
What policies or frameworks are required to address institutional national/ international issues in relation to the effective integration of ICTs into teaching and learning activities?
• What are the foundations, theoretical models and frameworks for distance education: The impact of social-cultural learning theories on distance education practice in the global context?
•
What are the implications for professional development with the expansion into the global environment, development of the global distance education market with technological mediated teaching and learning?
•
What are the theoretical and practical applications of communication technologies in distance learning? How does improved communication support/ promote/ advance rural economic sustainability?
Quality Quality assurance issues, particularly in relation to elearning and distance education is increasingly recognised as an issue (Jara & Mellar, 2010; Jung 2008) in higher education (Martens & Prosser, 1998). Identifying what constitutes high quality teaching and learning in higher education is well discussed in the literature (Ramsden1992). As Oliver, 2005 identifies, areas of assessment for quality are broad and processes for assessment well established. Quality assurance in this setting is achieved primarily through detailed examinations of the broad aims and goals across such diverse aspects of the teaching programs as the curriculum offered, its implementation, assessment processes and student learning (p. 175).
Quality assurance processes are typically benchmarking exercises or assessment against standards. As Ramsden (1992), emphasises, high quality teaching is about enabling and supporting high quality learning for students. Marten and Prosser, (1998) define high quality student learning as “learning which focuses fundamentally on the development of meaning and not on reproduction” (p.29). Given the rapid expansion of ICT supported distance learning, Sherry (2003), cautions that “demand rather than sound pedagogy” (p.436) is a major driver of this growth. Additionally, procedures and processes for developing high quality learning materials similar to those in place for traditional distance learning materials are not necessarily covered by those offering distance learning online. As Oliver, (2005) points out:
25
One of the main problems with elearning is that its practice has evolved from conventional teaching and learning and its application tends to involve variations and copies of face-to-face teaching rather than practices developed from a “Greenfield” approach (p.175).
This creates further questions in relation to the quality of the distance learner’s learning experience. In considering quality in teaching and learning Sherry (2003), highlights the importance of considering support structures and processes for distance learning in any assessment of quality. Inglis (2008) identifies that both institutions and quality agencies are recognising that minimum standards need to be adhered to in relation to the quality of elearning courses. While quality frameworks for online learning do exist, and considerable work has gone into selecting factors for these frameworks (McLoughlin & Visser 2003), Inglis (2008) comments that there are few processes in place for validating these frameworks, calling into question their suitably for determining quality. Oliver (2005) suggests that there are inherent difficulties in developing quality process for online learning given its ‘depth and breadth’. Additionally Jara & Mellar, (2010) suggest that quality processes are not necessarily applied to the elearning aspects of distance learning. There is a need to address this issue by undertaking validation activities and developing quality assurance processes for online learning materials and techniques.
Curriculum Design There are some excellent examples of engaging and innovative pedagogy relating to the use of ICTs and higher education. As Punie & Cabrera (2006) suggest, innovative use of ICTS could ‘contribute to making learning better, different, more interesting, pleasant and relevant than it is today’ (p 11). These innovative applications include: …experience-based learning via virtual worlds; experimental learning via computer generated simulations; pedagogic veils (products that teach people how to use them) and pedagogic learning objects; cognitive repair and support for people with special needs; Podcasting, Blogging, social proximity and synchronous learning; and Learning Content Management Systems (p.11).
However, there is some evidence emerging that the use of LMS and other ICT tools currently being utilised by higher education institutions focus on the transmission of information and that the majority of lecturers make little use of the interactive and web 2.00 aspects of these tools (McKeogh & Fox, 2009; Lonn & Teasley 2009; Jung 2009; Gosper et al, 2008). Additionally, where online learning forums such as discussion forums are utilised, these are not necessarily viewed as beneficial by distance learners (Dixon et al, 2007, Stobel et al, 2006) and distance students vary greatly in their desire to be part of formal learning communities (Anderson, 2008). The role of the lecturer in creating and managing online learning environments is considered essential if these are to be successful teaching and learning tools (Slazer, 2010; Cashion & Palmieri, 2002).
26
Identifying how staff use ICTs for distance learning and providing support such as design research projects to design, develop and evaluate curriculum approaches (Reeves & Oliver, 2003) may be important strategies to assist institutions and individuals to take advantage of the opportunities to engage students that are offered by ICT, but little exploited to date. Institutions need to indentify the factors to determine the most effective mix of technology in a given distant teaching situation. Additionally, an understanding of how ICTs are being utilised for distance teaching and learning will provide important information about the quality of distance learners’ learning experiences. Change management and reward structures to encourage staff investment in curriculum design activities will also be necessary to achieve widespread and sustainable change (Lingard, 2007). Further to this, the tension between research and teaching in higher education is also one that impacts negatively on staff teaching activities and increases their reluctance to take up new tools and skills. Additionally many issues of concern around assessment including appropriate assessment for ICT based learning are of concern in the curriculum design process. There is a need to explore curriculum design for distance learning that address these issues and support an engaging learning experience for students. Questions that need to be explored in relation to distance education curriculum design include:
•
What issues impact on linking of appropriate assessment to curriculum development?
•
What strategies for teaching and learning/assessment support life-long learning pedagogies?
•
What forms of teaching and learning/assessment, integrate well with mobile and other learning technologies?
•
What teaching and learning/assessment strategies, provide adequate formative feedback to encourage life-long learning processes?
•
What assessment strategies are appropriate for personal learning environments? How are these monitored? …accredited? …accrued?
Development of ‘soft skills’ The focus on the development of ‘soft skills’ or workplace skills is one that is of continuing importance to the higher education sector. Employers are increasingly seeking workers who demonstrate skills such as ‘networking, teamwork, collaboration and self-direction’ (Hughes, 2009, p. 9). While the value of developing such skills has been recognised for some time by institutions, processes for developing and auditing these skills comprehensively and consistently across programs have been slow to be implemented. In recent times organisation such as the Australian Learning and Teaching Council (ALTC) have recognised that the need to address issues in relation to these skills and have been proactive in allocating funds to support projects in this area.
27
However, the growing use of ICTs to deliver education creates challenges in achieving successful outcomes in relation to the development of these skills. ICTs, in particular web 2.0 technologies (Hughes 2009, are recognised for their ability to support the development of these skills particularly in relation to distance learners. However, current applications of ICTs which focus heavily on information transmission, (McKeogh & Fox, 2009; Lonn & Teasly, 2009; Jung, 2008) raise issues about the attention paid to the development of these soft skills, particularly for distance learners. Strategies to ensure appropriate development of soft skills will be an important focus of the continuing application of ICTs in higher education. Coupled with an increasing focus on open learning, this raises important questions for institutions in regard to how they will ensure such skills development for these students. Important questions include:
•
What teaching, learning and assessment strategies need to be utilised to support soft skills development for distance learners?
•
What impact will more open approaches to learning have on soft skills development and how might these be successfully addressed?
Academic development While the need for staff development for teaching and learning with ICTs is well acknowledged (Steel & Andrews, in press; Diaz et al, 2009; Hughes, 2009: Fitzgerald & Steel, 2008) many existing staff development programs appear to have been unsuccessful in supporting staff to develop skills in effective use of ICT (Jones, 2008). Further to this, Jones (2009) found that structural, cultural and pedagogical factors all impacted on the ability to successfully implement changes to teaching and learning practice. Institutions need to carefully consider the implications of the expansion of ICT use for distance education and this potential impact on staff. If such tools are to be effectively deployed, institutions need to systematically identify and address ongoing requirements for staff development in ways that meet institutional, disciplinary and individual needs (Jones, 2009). Additionally, institutions need to explore the ways in which staff wish to learn and develop programs that are effective in gaining commitment and effecting change.
28
Conclusions DEHub takes the view that ICT facilitated distance education will be the dominant form of higher education provision in the 21st century. This paper identifies a number of issues that are of concern to distance learning and the use of ICTs in the 21st Century. Amongst these needs, the blurring of modes of delivery enabled by ICT will continue, highlighting the importance of government and institutions identifying who are distance learners and ensuring that their needs and requirements are appropriately met (Guri-Rozenblit, 2009). As a high priority for addressing the needs of distance learners, there is a need for institutions to seriously address the issues of lecturer and student capacity to teach and learn with an increasing array of ICT technologies to ensure a high quality teaching and learning process. This will require comprehensive change management, staff development and incentive programs that focus on the development of teaching and learning skills including curriculum design. The recent axing of the Australian Teaching and Learning Council (ALTC) in Australia is considered a backward step in relation to ensuring high quality teaching and learning. As a consequence of this decision, institutions will need to take a greater responsibility in ensuring that programs, rewards and initiatives to ensure change and development in relation to teaching, learning and distance education continue. In responding to the need for change and building staff capacity, institutions will need to consider the structural, cultural and pedagogical barriers (Jones, 2009) that are currently impacting negatively on developing new skills and approaches for teaching and learning with ICTS in particular and develop strategies to overcome them. As well as addressing issues of capacity building for teaching and learning there is a need to understand how students are using the increasing range of ICTS including social networking tools and mobile technologies available to them for teaching and learning activities. This information is required to inform curriculum design and delivery issues and to support learners to use available technologies to learn in ways that suit their diverse needs. Additionally, inspite of the difficulties and challenges inherent in quality processes for online learning there is a need for government and institutions to work together to identify and develop quality process and requirements that address the specific needs of online distance learning and learners, rather than relying on processes adapted from face-to-face teaching environments (Jara & Mellar 2010; Oliver, 2005). Better understanding of the distance students’ voice in relationship to their teaching and learning experience, will provide valuable insights into how distance students experience learning with ICTs and inform what is required to improve and enhance this experience (Andrews & Tynan, 2010). Consequently, to address the priorities above, the need for research and development activities relating to the trends, issues and challenges outlined here is of paramount importance to the sector. Additionally, the sector will need to continue identifying research priorities in relation to teaching and learning and to commission and conduct a range of research projects.
29
References Anderson, T. (2008) (Ed). Theory and Practice of Online Learning, 2nd Edition, Athabasca University Press, Athabasca.
Andrews, T. & Tynan, B. (2010). Why the student voice? The case for investigating the distance learners’ experience of ICT in distance education. In Proceedings, Curriculum. Technology and Transformation for an unknown future, ASCILITE 2010, Sydney.
Allen, I.E. & Seaman, J. (2010). Learning on Demand: Online Education in the United States, 2009. Babscon Survey Research Group & the Sloan Consortium.
Allen, I.E. & Seaman, J. (2008). Staying the Course: Online Education in the United States, 2008. Babscon Survey Research Group & the Sloan Consortium. Andrews, T., Davidson, B., Hill, A, Sloane, D. & Woodhouse, L. (in press). Using students’ own mobile technologies to support clinical competency development in speech pathology in Kitchenham, A. (Ed.). Blended and Mobile Learning across Disciplines: Models for Implementation, IGI Global.
Andrews T. & Smyth, R. (2010). Utilising students own mobile devices and rich media: two case studies from the Health Sciences. In Dini, P. (Ed.). Proceedings The Second International Conference on Mobile, Hybrid, and On-line Learning: el & ml 2010, St Maarten, Netherlands Antilles.
Blandin, J. & Machin, S. (2004). Educational Inequality and the Expansion of the UK Higher Education System. Scottish Journal of Political Economy, 51(2), 230-249.Bradley, D. (2009). Review of Australian Higher Education (p.100). Canberra: DEEWAR. available from: http://www.dest.gov.au/sectors/higher_education/policy_issues_reviews/ reviews/highered_review/
Cashion, J., & Palmieri, P. (2002). The secret is the teacher. The learner’s view of online learning. Australian Flexible Learning Framework, Flexiblelearningnet.au; Australian National Training Authority.
Commonwealth of Learning, (2006). Learning and Living with technology: The
Commonwealth of Learning and the Millennium Development Goals. Available from: http:// www.col.org/progServ/programmes/Pages/mdg.aspx
Courant, P. N., & Griffith, R. J. (2006). Software and Collaboration in Higher Education: A Study of Open Source Software. Available from: http://e-learningcentre.co.uk/eclipse/ Resources/OOSS_Report_FINAL.pdf
30
D’Antoni, S. (2006). (Ed.). The Virtual University, Models and Messages: Lessons from Case Studies. Education on the Move Series, UNESCO& IEPP. Available from: http://www. unesco.org/liep/virtualuniversity/home.php
Diaz, V., Garret, P., Kinley, E., Moore, J., Schwartz, C., & Kohrman, P. (2009). Faculty development for the 21st Century. Educause Review, 44(3), 46-55. Available from: http://www.educause.edu/EDUCAUSE+Review/EDUCAUSEReviewMagazineVolume44/FacultyDevelopmentforthe21stCe/171776
Dixon, R., Dixon, K. & Siragusa, L. (2007). Individuals’ perceptions of online environments: What adult learners are telling us. In Proceedings, Providing Choices for Learners and learning, ASCILITE, Singapore 2007.
Donner, J (2008). Research Approaches to Mobile Use in the Developing World: A Review of the Literature. The Information Society, 24(3), 140-159.
Education.au (2009). 21st Century Learning Spaces, Education .au. Available from: www.esa. edu.au.
e.practice.eu. (2009). The Open University UK: Sharing Code and Content. Available from: http://www.epractice.eu/en/cases/openuniversityuk Gacek, C. & Arief, B. (2004). The Many Meanings of Open Source, IEEE Software, 21(1), 34-40.
Gigaom (2009). The summer of the superphone, http://gigaom.com/2009/06/07/the-summer-of-the-superphone/
Gillard, J. (2009). Speech, Australian Financial Review – Higher Education
Conference, 9th March. http://www.deewr.gov.au/Ministers/Gillard/Media/Speeches/Pages/ Article_090310_141130.aspx
Gosper, M., Green, D., McNeill, M., Phillips, R. A., Preston, G., & Woo, K. (2008). Final Report: The Impact of Web-Based Lecture Technologies on Current and Future Practices in Learning and Teaching. Sydney: Australian Learning and Teaching Council. [Online] Available at http://www.altc.edu....port_aug08.pdf.
Guri-Rozenblit, S. (2009). Challenges facing Distance Education in the 21st Century: Policy and Research Implications. In Bernath, U., Szucs. A., Tait, A.& Vidal, M. (Eds.). Distance and E-learning in Transition: Learning Innovation, Technology and Social Challenges. Wiley-ISTE.
Guri-Rosenblit S. (2005). Distance education’ and ‘e-learning’: Not the same thing. Higher
31
Education 49, 467-493.
Hardy, J., Haywood, d., Haywood, J., Bates, S., Paterson, J., Rhind, J. & McLeod, H. (2009) ICT & the Student First Year Experience: A report from the LEaD project. JISC.http://www. jisc.ac.uk/publications/documents/leadfinalreport.aspx
Hughes, A (2009). Higher Education in a web 2.0 World. JISC. Available from: http://www.jisc. ac.uk/publications/documents/heweb2.aspx
IBIS. (2009). University and other Higher Education in Australia: IBIS Business report. Available from: http://www.ibisworld.com.au/ http://www.ibisworld.com.au/ industry/retail.aspx?indid=600&chid=1
Inglis, A. (2008). Approaches to the Validation of Quality Frameworks for eLearning. Quality Assurance in Education, 16(4), 347-62.
Jara, M., & Mellar. H. (2009). “Factors affecting quality enhancement procedures for e-learning courses.� Quality Assurance in Education 17(3): 220-232.
Jarvis, P., Holford, J. & Griffin, C. (2003). The Theory and Practice of Learning, 2nd Edition, Kogan Page: London & USA.
Jefferies, A (2009). STROLL (Student Reflections on Lifelong e-Learning): Methodology Report. University of Hertfordshire.
Jung, I. (2008). ICT and Quality assurance to support ubiquitous access to distance education: Promises, realities and recent breakthroughs. Keynote speech. Fifth EDEN Research Workshop, organised by EDEN in collaboration with CNED & UNESCO. http://www. slideshare.net/eden_online/ict-and-quality- assurance-to-support-ubiquitous-access-to-distance-education-promises-realities-and-recent-breakthroughs-presentation
Jones, A. (2009). Crossing boundaries: Curriculum Change in Higher Education. Society for Research into Higher Education (SRHE) Annual Conference, 8-10 December, Celtic Manor, Newport, South Wales.
Jones, C. (2008). Infrastructures, institutions and networked learning. 6th International Conference on Networked Learning, Halkidiki, Greece, Lancaster University, Lancaster. Kennedy, G., Dalgarno, B., Bennett, S., Gray, K., Judd, T., Waycott, J., Chang, R., Bishop, A., Maton K. & Krause, K-L. (2009). Education the Net Generation: Implications for Learning and Teaching in Australian Universities: Final Report. ALTC.
32
Kolb, A & Kolb, D. (2005). Learning Styles and Learning Spaces: Enhancing Experiential Learning in Higher Education. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 4 (2), 193-212.
Kreutzer, T. (2009). Generation mobile: online and digital media usage on mobile phones among low-income urban youth in South Africa. University of Cape Town, Cape Town.
Learning Landscape Project Team (2008). The Cambridge Pathfinder Journey: The Experience of the Learning Landscape Project http://www.caret.cam.ac.uk/blogs/llp/wp.
Lingard, M. (2007). Why don’t all lecturers make use of VLE’s? What Can the So-Called ‘Laggards’ Tell Us? A report submit towards an MA Information and Communications Technology (ICT) in Education.
Long, P. & Erhmann, S. (2005). Future of the Learning Space: Breaking out of the box, EDUCAUSE Review, July/August.
Lonn, S. & Teasley, S. (2009). Saving time or innovating practice: Investigating perceptions and uses of Learning Management Systems. Computers and Education, 33(3), 686-694.
Mason, R. (2006). The University- current Challenges and opportunities, in D’Antoni,
S. (Ed.). The Virtual University, Models and Messages; Lessons from case studies. UNESCO & IIEP. Available from: http://www.unesco.org/liep/virtualuniversity/home.php
Martens, E. & Prosser, M. (1998). What constitutes high quality teaching and learning and how to assure it. Quality Assurance in Higher Education, 6 (1), 28-36.
Matkin, G. (2009). Open Content, Open Courses, Open Degrees. UCEA 94th Annual Conference, April 1-4 Boston, MA.
McKeogh, K. & Fox, S. (2009). Academic staff in traditional Universities: Motivators and Demotivators in the Adoption of E-Learning. In Bernath, U., Szucs. A., Tait, A. & Vidal, M. (Eds.). Distance and E-learning in Transition: Learning Innovation, Technology and Social Challenges. London: Wiley-ISTE.
McLoughlin, C. & Visser, T. (2003). Quality e-learning: Are there universal indicators?, 16th Open and Distance Learning Association of Australia. Canberra: Open Distance Learning Association of Australia (ODLAA).
Miller, D. (2007). Mobile Phones and Development: The future in new hands? iD21 insights Retrieved May 20, 2009 available from: www.id21.org/insights/insights69/ insights69.pdf
33
National Audit Office. (2008). Widening participation in higher education: Report by the Comptroller and Auditor General. HC 725 Session 2007-2008 | 25 June 2008. Available from: www.nao.org.uk
Oblinger, D. G. and Oblinger, J. L. (2005). Educating the net generation, An Educause e-book publication. Available from: http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/pub7101.pdf
Oliver, R. (2005). Quality assurance and e-learning: blue skies and pragmatism, ALT-J, 13(3), 173-87.
Pascarella, E. & Terenzini, P. (1998). Studying College Students in the 21st Century: Meeting New Challenges. The Review of Higher Education. 21(2), 151-165.
Patterson, B & McFadden, C. (2009). Attrition in Online and Campus Degree Programs. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 12 (2). http://www.westga. edu/~distance/ojdla/summer122/patterson112.html
Phillips, R., Gopser, M., NcNeill, M., Woo, K., Preston, G. & Green, D. (2007). Staff & Student perspectives on web based lecture technologies: insights into the great divide. In proceedings ASCILITE 2007, Singapore.
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1- 6.
Punie, Y. & Cabrera, M. (2006). The Future of ICT and Learning in the Knowledge Society. Report on a joint DG JRC-DG EAD Workshop held in Seville, 20-21 October, 2005. European Commission Directorate General, Joint Research Centre.
Radcliffe, D., Wilson, H., Powell, D. and Tibbetts, B. (Eds.). (2009). Learning Space in Higher Education: Positive Outcomes by Design: Proceedings of the Next Generation Learning Spaces 2008 Colloquium, University of Queensland, Brisbane.
Ramaprasad, A. (2009). Ubiquitous Learning: An Ontology. Ubiquitous Learning: An International Journal, 1(1), 57-65. Available from: SSRN: http://ssrn.com/ abstract=1305686
Ramsden, P. (1992). Learning to Teach in Higher Education, Routledge, London.
Reeves, T. C., Herrington, J., & Oliver, R. (2005). Design research: A socially responsible approach to instructional technology research in higher education. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 16(2), 97-116.
34
Scott, P. (2009). Access in Higher Education in Europe and North America: Trends and Development Paper presented at the UNESCO Forum on Higher Education in The Europe Region: Access, Values, Quality and Competitiveness, 21-24 May, Bucharest, Romania.
Selwyn, N. 2010). Degrees of digital division: Reconsidering digital inequalities and contemporary higher education. In Monograph “Redefining the Digital Divide in Higher Education Revista de Univesity y Sociedad del Conocimiento RUSC, 7(1), 33-42.
Sherry, A. (2003). Quality and its Measurement in Distance Education. In Moore, M. & Anderson, W. (Eds.). Handbook of Distance Education. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Slazer, J. S., (2010) Web Based Instruction. In Bradshaw, M & Lowenstien, A., (Eds.) Innovative Teaching Strategies in Nursing and Health Related Professions. Jones & Bartlett Publishers.
Stephenson, M. (2009). International and Comparative Indigenous Rights Via Video-Conferencing’ Legal Education Review, 19(2), 237-255.
Steel, C. & Andrews, T. (in press). Reimaging Teaching for Technology Enriched Learning Spaces in Keppel, M. Souter, K. & Riddle, M. (Eds). Physical and Virtual Learning Spaces in Higher Education: Concepts for the Modern Learning Environment. IGI Global.
Stodel, E., Thompson, T. & McDonald, C. (2006). Learners’ Perspectives on What is Missing from Online Learning: Interpretations through the Community of Inquiry Framework. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 7 (3). Available from: http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/viewArticle/325/743.
Techdis. (2006). Techdis Senior Management Briefing: e-learning as an accessibility Investment. JISC Techdis http://www.techdis.ac.uk/index.php?p=2_2_3_3
The Sutton Trust (2008). Report to the national Council of Teaching Excellence: Increasing higher education participation amongst disadvantaged young people and schools in poor communities. Presented to NCTE, April, 2008. http://www.suttontrust.com/ annualreports.asp
Thody, Angela (2008) Learning landscapes for universities: mapping the field [or] Beyond a seat in the lecture hall: a prolegemenon of learning landscapes in universities. N/A . ISSN UNSPECIFIED (Unpublished) Available from : http://eprints.lincoln.ac.uk/1597/
35
Timmis, S., Oleary, R., Weedon, E., Harrison, C. & Martin, K. (2004). Different Shoes, Same Footprints? A cross-Disciplinary Evaluation Of Students’ Online Learning Experiences: Preliminary Findings from the SOLE Project.
Trelevan, L. & Voola, R. (2008). Integrating the Development of Graduate Attributes Through Constructive Alignment, Journal of Marketing Education, 30(2) 160 -173.
Tynan, B. and Smyth R. (2007). (Eds) Collaborations to offer small courses Forum,Final Report. University of New England, May 2007.
UNESCO. (2009). Will ICTs make the traditional University obselete? Education. Available from: http://www.unesco.org/en/wche2009/single-view/news/icts_changing_the_face_ of_higher_education/back/9712/
Van Der Werf, M. & Sabatier, G. (2009). The College of 2020: Students. Chronicle Research Services. http://research.chronicle.com.
Warschauser, M. (2002). Reconceptualising the digital divide. First Monday 7(7) http:// firstmonday.org/ htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/viewArticle/967/888
Williams, J. & Fardon, M. (2007). Perpetual connectivity: lecture recordings and portable media players. In Proceedings ASCILITE 2007, Singapore
Wood, D. & Dodd, A. (2010). Preparing students and community organisations for effective use of ICTs through a service learning initiative. In proceedings: Curriculum, technology & transformation for an unknown future, ASCILITE 2010, Sydney.
Yorke, M. & Thomas, L. (2003). Improving the retention of students from Lower Socio-Economic Groups. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management. 25(1), 63-74. Zacker.org. (n.d.) Higher-ed LMS market penetration: Moodle vs. Blackboard+WebCT vs. Sakai, available from http://www.zacker.org/higher-ed-lms-marketpenetration-moodle-vs-blackboard-vs-sakai.
36
37