Distance learning policies and interactive television in engineering education

Distance learning, sometimes called "distance education" is, according to Kerka (1996), a method of education in which the learner is physically separated from the professor and the institution sponsoring the instruction. Distance education may be used on its own, or in conjunction with other forms of education, including face-to-face instruction.

The advent of television and, indeed, the whole complex of newer communications media (from video to satellites) has given American citizens unparalleled opportunities to advance in their ability to record, disseminate, and communicate ideas. These new communication resources must now be harnessed to serve education. (Educational Media Study panel, 1962, p.15)

The purpose of this paper is to take an in-depth look at policies and written procedures that pertain to instruction of baccalaureate level courses taught through the use of the interactive television at Colleges of Engineering which are accredited by Accredited Board of Engineering and Technology (ABET), as a means of distance learning. This paper emphasizes those factors that need to be most considered in policy development and formulation for the use of this technology as it relates to distance education and distance learning.

Colleges and universities, in an attempt to reach students who cannot come to regular classrooms on campus are utilizing satellite, open circuit, microwave, computer, telephone, and other related media. (Portway, 1991)

Pioneers in the media introduced Interactive Television seven years before the world's fair in New York in 1932 as an experiment in Ames, Iowa. The station W9XK used this as an experiment developed by the electrical engineering department of the State University of Iowa.

Once a new technology rolls over you, if you are not part of the steamroller, you are part of the road (Steward Brand).

During a presentation in 1999 on the subject, Dr. Linda Harasim said, "A Great Debate is raging, but fuelled by heat rather than light. Online Education is hot but media as well as both promoters and detractors have taken the stage. Faculty and educators concerned with educational effectiveness have been sidelined." (Harasim)

DeSpain, Johnson (2000), Interactive Television, has strong evidence that distance education is becoming an increasingly visible feature of post-secondary education in this country (U.S. Dept. Of Education, Lewis, Snow, Farris, Lewin, & Green, 2000). The 1995 U.S. Dept. Of Education Statistical Analysis Report stated "79% of U.S. higher education institutions planned to start or increase the number of computer-based technology distance education courses in next 3 years." Murphy (2000, p.1) quoted a study by Market Data Retrieval, a subsidiary of Shelton, Connecticut-based Dunn & Bradstreet Corp., which found that "seventy-five percent (75%) of the 4,400 post-secondary schools in the United States are offering distance learning classes."

Much of distance education is focused on the definition of distance education, the degree of learner satisfaction correlated with such variables as cognitive learning styles (Ehrman,1990) and instructor styles (Coleway, 1987), the effectiveness of distance education as measured by quantity and quality of learning (Garrison, 1990;Stubbs & Burnham,1990; and the characteristics of distance learners (Afman,1987,1988).

Kerka (1996) notes that in any distance education process there must be a professor, one or more students, and a course or curriculum that the professor is capable of teaching and the student is trying to learn. The contract between professors and learner, whether in a traditional classroom or distance education, requires that the student be taught, assessed, given guidance, and, where appropriate, prepared for examinations that may or may not be conducted by the institution. Some form of two-way communication must accomplish these requirements.

This is a critical element of distance learning, and sets apart Distant Learning from a passive watching of television. Students or learners must communicate with the facilitator or professor. A simple broadcast from the professor, teacher, or facilitator to the student is not enough. The medium used must allow for this important and critical two-way communication. It is from this process that the instructor interprets that the student is progressing with the course material. From watching body language, facial expressions, and actual classroom work, the professor or facilitator determines that the learner is on track or lost, and needs assistance. Experienced trainers and professors master teaching skills, and learn how to question students properly to determine the progression of learning. This interaction, available only with two-way communication, is vital.

Kerka (1996) notes that in this the two-way communication that is part of all education, instruction can be accomplished by diverse methods of instruction delivery. Some examples of these alternative methods are:

Home-based study

Telecommunications using the phone or fax

Videotape

CD-ROM

Online instruction.

However, one alternative method of delivering instruction, a method that is being used increasingly frequent, is interactive television. According to Ostendorf (1994), interactive television typically involves an instructor who meets with students via the television while in a classroom at the originating site. The students communicate from designated remote sites using the interactive television technology. Through the television cameras, the instructor can hear and see the students at remote sites. The students can see, hear, communicate, and interact with the instructor.

ISSUES RELATED TO POLICY DEVELOPMENT

FOR INTERACTIVE TELEVISION AND DISTANCE LEARNING

All states are unique in distance learning policy development. However, policy must be part of an initial development" (Hazel, Feb. 4, 1991)

Instructional Television (see Distance education at a Glance, Guide #5 Engineering Outreach, University of Idaho) Interactive Television, is an effective distance education delivery system that can be integrated in the curriculum at all levels, single lesson, selected unit, or full course programs of specific topics or concept. Interactive Television may be either passive or interactive. Passive Interactive Television typically involves pre-produced programs, which are distributed by videocassette or by video-based technologies such as broadcast, cable, or satellite. In contrast, Interactive Television provides opportunities for viewer interaction, either with a live instructor or a participating student site. For example, two-way television with two-way audio allows all students to view and interact with the teacher (see Lochte, 1993).

DeSpain, Heeney, and Livingston (l999) have noted that while many schools and colleges utilize various alternative methods of instruction delivery for distance learning, they often fail to set up a clear method of formal policy and procedures relating to the use of this particular mode of instruction delivery. Consequently, the delivery of instruction using the method is seldom optimized. According to the authors, optimal use requires an examination of various procedures and processes (e.g., training, instructional support, extra compensation, adjusted teaching loads, and so forth) as well as the formulation of policy regarding these procedures and processes that is based on said examination. These factors, therefore, need to be examined in any comprehensive exploration of the use of interactive television in distance learning. Each of these factors is discussed below.

The American Association of University Professors (AAUP) issued a Statement on Faculty Workload 1970. This statement from the AAUP was developed prior to the significant development of Distant Learning in the United States.

As a result, the standards articulated within the AAUP policy statement articulate to the traditionally defined classroom. Even so, the AAUP statement remains the basis of the Association's standards for maximum faculty workload. The AAUP now takes the position that the workload should be:

For undergraduate instruction, a teaching load of twelve hours per week, with no more than six separate course preparations during the academic year.

For instruction partly or entirely at the graduate level, a teaching load of nine hours per week.

The AAUP statement recognizes that the standard method of workload measurement "hours per week of formal class meetings" is inadequate and that other factors, such as preparation and class size, also need to be addressed in the formulation of a faculty workload policy. (AAUP)

The widespread development of distance learning in the American Academy since 1969 requires the American Association of University Professors to reexamine workload and compensation formulations. The AAUP states "Class size, preparation, and student evaluation are specific issues that must be addressed, as well as overall commitment of time on the part of faculty."

Brigham Young University successfully tested the Distant Education methodology. "Maintaining ABET-accredited engineering programs requires hands-on laboratory experiences in addition to course instruction and theory. Web courses that satisfy both required elements have not been available in the past. During the past year, (1999) educators and academicians have openly debated the educational benefits of online instruction. Some have argued the foundational principles underwriting the "virtual university" while others have questioned whether or not such innovative developments can meet the high standards of traditional college and university curricula." (BYU)

The effectiveness of the Distant Education at an ABET (Accredited Board of Engineering and Technology) institution was documented in 1999. During the fall and winter semesters, 1998-99, a Brigham Young University classroom was linked via the Internet to a classroom at Brigham Young University-Idaho in Rexburg, Idaho, allowing lectures to be interactively shared by 260 students in the BYU lecture hall in Utah, and 54 students at the Idaho campus. (BYU)

The course offered was Brigham Young University's ME 172. This course has long been identified as one rich in theory while complex and demanding in its hands-on laboratory component. Both the lecture sessions and the course laboratory require substantial individual study, concentration, and practice to demonstrate mastery of related concepts. Likewise, ME 172 has enduring linkages to industrial practices.

The Distant Education component offered a fifty-minute connection made three times a week for fifteen weeks during each semester. Collaborating students from both University locations were required to complete nineteen laboratory exercises (ten tutored lessons, and nine production drawings -- including final assembly drawings), using the Pro/E software to model and define each mechanical component or assembly. The Pro/E software was resident only at Brigham Young University's CAD Laboratory. Before the professors assigned each lab project, a live lab session was conducted, similar to the lecture periods. The only difference being that instead of PowerPoint slides being displayed to the students, Pro/E was interactively shared over the Internet between the two school locations. (BYU)

According to the Brigham Young University, the primary objectives of the ME 172 experiment was to develop a philosophy that would help to Quantify the effectiveness of using the Internet for course instruction and delivery.

Satisfy student interaction requirements for hands-on laboratory practice, using third-generation CAD systems.

C. Greg Jensen, Associate Professor, and E. Max Raisor, Professor, both in the Mechanical Engineering Department, developed and delivered the digital course extension that accomplished both tasks.

The knowledge gained from the ME 172 experiment has been expanded and tested in two additional ways:

Students at Brigham Young University collaborated on a design, analysis and manufacturing epicyclic air engine project via the internet with California State University at Los Angeles and Institute of Higher Learning at Monterrey, Mexico.

The Brigham Young University Center for Instructional Design is in the process of converting Raisor's approximately 4000 PowerPoint slides, dozens of AVI/MPEG movies, and numerous Jpegs (used in the traditional class, and currently available on the Class Website) to a commercial quality rigorous interactive asynchronous engineering graphics course. (BYU)

The results collected from the two-semester Distant Education ME 172 course experiment are compelling. From the Brigham Young University report, the following data is offered:

90% of the students at Brigham Young University-Idaho related the overall experience as very favorable.

63% of participating Brigham Young University-Idaho students rated the class interaction (two-way multimedia) as very favorable.

The Brigham Young University -Idaho students were evenly divided in their opinions regarding the importance of viewing the live video of the instructor during lectures and labs.

In spite of the scheduling difficulties, a majority of the students (65%) at BYU-Idaho rated the collaboration experience (working with a team of students at BYU) as very favorable.

A favorable (70%) rating was given to the in-class PowerPoint instruction methods.

When considering the usefulness of the asynchronous PowerPoint resource materials, 78% of the BYU-Idaho students rated them very useful to hard to do without.

Usefulness of the comprehensive class Website, 70% of the students at the remote site rated it very useful to hard to do without.

Other data suggested that Brigham Young University-Idaho students learned CAD skills on a par with students at the main campus Brigham Young University. Brigham Young University students scored an average of 6.5 (out of 10) on a Pro/E skills rating test, while the students at Brigham Young University -Idaho scored an average of 5.3. In all other tested areas, however, the Brigham Young University-Idaho students either matched or exceeded the Brigham Young University scores. (BYU)

An interesting conclusion was also developed as a result of this Distant Education experiment. The data developed also indicated that the regular coaching by Brigham Young University students offered to other students was not as effective as was initially surmised. (BYU)

The New Mexico State University (NMSU) has developed a written policy regarding the professional development of their Faculty:

The NMSU policy states, "Faculty professional development activities include: attending seminars and lectures, participation in training workshops, attending professional conferences, professional writing activities, review activities, and conducting new and original research. In particular, five of the faculty in the department have participated in "Instructional Technologies and Learning" workshops where they have learned the skills to use computer technology and the web site in their classrooms. The ME Department has the largest percentage of the faculty in the College of Engineering who practice technology-assisted instruction.

Several of the faculty have been teaching distance education courses to our graduate students at the Boeing Company. The distance education students are located in Seattle at various Boeing locations in the Puget Sound area. The courses are taught via live satellite broadcast or are video taped live and mailed to the students at Boeing. Course material is provided over the web.

The Mechanical Engineering student full-time faculty ratio is approximately 11:1, which is the same as the average in the College of Engineering. Consequently, we are able to provide sufficient one-on-one interaction with students.

Our class sizes are small, with an average of 24 in each lecture section and 12 in each lab section. Average class size for other courses (non-ME courses) taken by ME students is 49. The largest classes in the Department may have as many as 75 students in them.

For these reasons, our students have more access to faculty than do those at most other institutions. When taking courses outside the College of Engineering, our students sometimes encounter larger classes, especially in CHEM 111 (up to 200 students). However, even these courses are taught by regular or adjunct faculty members, not student assistants. Only one course in the Mechanical Engineering (ME 260) is currently taught by a Teaching Assistant who is a Ph.D. Candidate." (NMSU)

The Central Missouri State University (CMSU) reported the progress their Distant Education program was making in 1999. In a report, the CMSU reported the following about their Distance Education program:

Distance Learning at Central Missouri State University encompasses all formats of electronically-based educational delivery systems which includes interactive television, instruction involving satellite uplinks and downlinks, and online courses. The Office of Extended Campus manages, schedules, coordinates and assists in marketing all distance education courses and degree programs. Faculty training, instructional design support and an incentive program are offered to instructors participating in distance education and appropriate student services are provided to meet the additional needs of the learner at a distant site. In the last year, major emphasis and energy has been placed on the development, delivery and administrative issues inherent with online courses. Numbers of students learning in a Central distance education environment as well as the number of course offerings have increased each semester (i.e. Spring to Spring, Fall to Fall comparisons) by approximately 50% each semester. Central is a charter member of the Western Missouri Educational Technology Consortium, the largest educational consortium in the state of Missouri. This network, along with newly-installed technology which provides dial-up access, provides Central the necessary connectivity to successfully conduct two-way, continuous presence, interactive television courses within, and outside of, Central's traditional regional and state boundaries." (CMSU)

TRAINING

In considering training required of professors delivering Distant Education courses, the first consideration is the methods used to teach a student. While there are numerous media available using today's technology, the available methods of delivering the course can be placed in four categories:

Print - The printed word is the fundamental element of distance education programs. All other education delivery systems have evolved from the printed word. There are a variety of print formats available for use by the Distance Education educator, including traditional textbooks, printed study guides, workbooks, course syllabi, handouts, journals, periodicals, and case studies.

Voice - The instructional audio tools available include the interactive technologies of telephone, audio conferencing, and short-wave radio. Passive or one-way only from-the-instructor-to-the-student audio communication tools include audio tapes and radio.

Video - The Instructional video tools include still images such as overhead transparencies, slides, pre-produced moving images on film or videotape, and real-time moving images combined with audio conferencing. (This media can be either a one-way or a two-way video with one-way or a two-way audio system in use at the same time).

Data - Via a network, computers send and receive data and information electronically. The networks can be Local Area Networks (LANs), Wide Area Networks (WANs), or the Internet. Data is used to describe this broad category of growing instructional tools. Computer applications for distance education are varied and include:

Computer-assisted instruction (CAI) - uses the computer as a self-contained teaching machine to present individual lessons.

Computer-managed instruction (CMI) - uses the computer to organize instruction and track student records and progress. The instruction itself need not be delivered via a computer, however CAI is often combined in use with CMI.

Computer-mediated education (CME) - describes computer applications that facilitate the delivery of instructional course work. Some examples include:

Electronic mail

Real-time computer conferencing

World-Wide Web applications

From reviewing these various Medias, it is obvious that one set training standard required just to deliver Distance Education is impossible to create. For example, the first consideration is what type of delivery method is being used. If one-way, audio tape presentations are being deployed, the amount of training needed by the professor would simply consist of turning on and off a tape recorder. But if the professor will be using CME video conferencing, then the professor must be trained on how to operate the necessary equipment. If the professor used other similar equipment, the training required would be significantly less than a first-time professor using the equipment. It seems logical that the most common approach taken is often informal, one-on-one training for the professors to learn to use the necessary equipment and technology being deployed. There seems at this time to be no preset or predetermined training methodology or requirements for a professor that will be delivering a Distant Education training course.

The American Association of University Professors (AAUP) addressed the issue of training required by a professor prior to the start of an educational course. The Preparation Required by the professor is significant. The AAUP noted, in a report with recommendations, that "The various forms of distance learning increase the preparation requirements of the instructor and therefore have a direct impact on workload formulations and compensation.

Distance learning requires faculty to develop expertise and preparation in technical areas apart from traditional academic education. The instructor in distance learning must have specific knowledge of particular computer software programs used in distance learning courses as well as knowledge of television studio procedures if the course is televised. Some colleges, under the banner of "faculty development," are now requiring faculty to undergo special technical and performance training before teaching in distance learning programs. Such requirements are not easily applied to traditional formulations of workload and compensation.

Distance learning courses usually require greater preparation for each class session than is typical for the standard lecture class. Most distance learning television studios, for example, are not equipped with chalkboards, and instructors must prepare written materials suitable for the camera and electronic transmission rather than writing spontaneously on the chalkboard.

Distance learning courses affect timelines. Faculty who are accustomed to distributing materials in class, for example, must prepare and mail materials to distance learning students enrolled in interactive televised courses in anticipation of the class activity for a particular day. In televised courses, faculty must also spend additional preparation time working with technical and support staff in order to ensure that the class occurs in a smooth and uninterrupted manner. While in some ways the delivery of material is technically easier in online or recorded courses, the fact remains that material preparation is significantly different for distance learning courses.

Whatever the context or specific situation, the instructor must often prepare for multiple student audiences simultaneously, one in the traditional classroom and the other (or others) by distance learning.

Distance learning courses often alter the manner in which faculty assess or evaluate student performance. Faculty are required to postpone immediate assessment of student performance within a traditional classroom in favor of a telephone conversation or an e-mail letter at a later time or date. Student assessment in distance learning courses also becomes problematic in courses in which direct observation of the student by the instructor is the optimum situation. Also, formal examinations must be restructured in distance learning courses in order to accommodate students who are enrolled at off-campus sites or who are viewing the course on television or over the Internet. Chapter quizzes, for example, which are often given in traditional lecture courses in order to encourage students to keep up with reading assignments, are not feasible in distance learning courses. In each case cited above, faculty must spend additional preparation time resolving problems pertaining to student assessment or evaluation." (AAUP)

In their discussion of training using interactive television in distance learning, Johnson and DeSpain (2002), note that any institution of learning wishing to use interactive television for purposes of distance learning must consider the cost of not only the technology but also the training required for all of those using the system, most especially the teachers. It also needs to be realized that this type of instruction sometimes requires professors and teachers to undergo a radical shift in their instructional paradigms.

Any training given to instructors needs to take this shift in paradigm into account. This, according to Johnson and DeSpain (2002), means that instructors are quite likely to require extensive training, and even re-training following the implementation of the system. The authors also recommend that ongoing research into training needs be undertaken to ensure that there is coverage of all components necessary to optimal use of interactive television for instructional purposes.

Regarding training instructors in interactive television, Kune (2002) has made the point that instructors need a great deal of practice with the system as part of the training process. This is because they must learn the technology to such a degree that its operation does not interfere with their focus on the content of the course which they are instructing. Thus, an overview and orientation to the interactive television system is insufficient, as is some minimal time practicing with the system. Kune points out that adequate training should not only be extensive but it should include the use of the system in the actual environment where instructors are expected to teach in order to engender a strong degree of confidence in system use.

In terms of the overall tone and nature of training given to instructors using interactive television for purposes of distance learning, Beaudoin (1990) stated that effective training programs have certain stable features. Specifically, it is noted that such programs, must offer convincing, no-nonsense and on-going training that deals with how to teach at a distance, not merely how to manipulate new instructional technology...(Further)... top administration must provide leadership to overcome resource limitations, remove structural constraints, and combat attitudinal barriers (Beaudoin, 1990, p. 27).

In other words, training cannot simply be focused on how to use the technology, but rather upon how to use the technology for instructional purposes that facilitate learning.

According to recommendation four, made after researching distance education training, Arkansas State University of Jonesboro, by the committee on distance education listed these conditions for training, which are used at other institutions around the nation also, one in particular is San Diego State University.

Basic Preparation: the semester prior to teaching Interactive Television, the faculty will receive instruction in the following areas:

Definition of Interactive Television

Interactive Television site

Room Layout

Equipment

Operation

Technical Training:ELMO, whiteboard, showing a video, softboard

Observation of Interactive Television classes

Distance site services (mail, fax, test proctoring)

Presentation by the faculty member receiving Interactive Television training

Turning on the codec and monitors

Dialing the distant sites(s) to establish a link

Shutting down the Equipment

Along with minimum technical requirements, Interactive Television training is an effective instructional tool for the distance educator. According to the University of Idaho, Engineering Outreach program Guide #10, as with other technologies, its usefulness is directly related to the instructors understanding of its benefits, limitations, and utilization strategies.

INSTRUCTIONAL SUPPORT

Johnson and DeSpain (2002) have noted that the effectiveness of distance learning cannot be achieved without providing instructional support for teachers in terms of utilizing the technology to attain all specified learning objectives. Instructors need help and knowledge regarding such matters as the integration of additional hardware, equality and quality of the hardware, accessibility to students, maintenance, and so forth. Johnson and DeSpain (2002) also note that if colleges and schools are to maximize their use of interactive television they must offer faculty strong instructional support. The type of support needed provides both leadership and assistance to instructors as to the most effective and efficient means of accomplishing both institutional objectives and the shorter-term classroom objectives set for the course through the specific medium of interactive television.

Instructors are also said to need an organized, readily accessible collection of materials and equipment that will assist them in meeting the goals and objectives set for the use of the interactive television system. In this regard, the overall goal of any school or institution should be to provide a staff that is well qualified, concerned, and involved in the use of the interactive television system for instruction delivery. What is required is a faculty who not only thoroughly understands the interactive television system and its use but also understands various elements and components of the system and how to use each of these to meet student needs.

In terms of instructional support, Cuffman and MacRae (2001) state that what is needed is a strong faculty development program for those instructors involved in the use of interactive television for distance learning. Support includes the environment. In this regard, the authors note that faculty needs a proper facility as well as state-of -- the art equipment and software related to instructional materials. They need to have access to relevant labs and to understand all possible equipment and technology that supports the use of interactive television in the classroom. They also need to understand what components of this equipment their school/college has and does not have.

The American Federation of Teachers (AFT) offers a strong position about the support professors must be given when conducting Distance Learning classes. "Faculty must be provided adequate training and technical support -- in terms of hardware, software, and troubleshooting. The importance of adequate technical support was emphasized repeatedly by faculty in the field. Support should include special assistance in instructional design. Upon request, the institution must enable faculty members to work with knowledgeable instructional and technical design specialists in designing courses as long as the faculty member has the final say about presentation." (AFT)

CONCLUSIONS

This examination of the use of interactive television for distance learning demonstrated the need for those involved in planning and implementing such programs to consider several factors. Faculty need to be trained not only in the use of the technologies but also in how to adapt their teaching knowledge and style to the technologies. They need supportive help as well, help that supports the formal process of initial organized training.

Regarding training, this must help instructors undergo any resistance they might have to using the interactive system as a result of changes occurring in their instructional paradigm. It is also likely that some re-training may be needed following implementation of the system. Further, training needs to encompass lengthy and extensive practice in order to make sure that when instructors are actually using the system they can focus on course content and not the hardware.

As to instructional support, the reviewed literature indicated that support systems should help instructors to use the interactive television system in a manner that facilitates the attainment of all learning objectives. To this end, instructors need help with a variety of matters including the integration of additional hardware, equality and quality of the hardware, accessibility to students, maintenance. They need leadership and assistance, as well as an organized and readily accessible collection of materials and equipment. Finally, they need to be allowed to instruct in an environment that is adequate to the technological task required of them, an environment with a proper facility and state-of-the-art equipment.

Instructors also need to be compensated for the time and skills required to effectively utilize the interactive television system. Compensation can be delivered in a variety of ways. However, institutions should not fail to offer extra compensation, this is because the literature indicated that it operates as an incentive and also builds an increased sense of commitment to the institution or school.

Another important element regarding the use of interactive television for distance learning is that instructors often require additional time to prepare, plan and even teach the course. This means that adjustments have to be made in their workloads. Schools need to consider the formulation of formal policies regarding this adjustment, as well as all of the factors that were reviewed in this report.

The foregoing point is especially important. In their examination and conducted research on policy development as it related to the use of interactive television in educational institutions, Johnson and DeSpain (2002) noted that despite the fact that distance education and learning were becoming more and more an integral part of educational offerings, many institutions failed to formulate official policy regarding its use. As a result, instructors do not always get all of the training required to properly utilize the equipment, there is a lack of equity from institution to institution regarding compensation and adjustments for workloads, and often there is very little monitoring as to whether either instructors or students are actually using the system properly.

The active support of the administration toward the faculty appears to be a key and necessary element in the overall success of any Distant Education program. Administrators must recognize the additional workload and the challenges of developing and delivering Distant Learning courses. Administrators must do more than provide verbal support. Actual adjustments to workload, providing sufficient preparation time, recognition of additional work requirements are all part of what Administrators must do to make a Distant Learning program successful.

Chapter 2 Bibliography

Central Missouri State University (CMSU), Annual Report for 1998-99 A copy is available at http://www.cmsu.edu/provost/images/ar9899.pdf

New Mexico State University (NMSU), Self-Evaluation Report A copy is available at http://www.me.nmsu.edu/ABET%20Self%20Assessment/Output/ABET_SABTOC.html

Linda Harasim Ph.D., The Great Debate - State-of-the-Art in Post-secondary Education, TeleLearning Network of Centres of Excellence 1999. A copy of the complete copy of the presentation is available at http://www.telelearn.ca/conference99/presentations/harasim_SOTA_PS.pdf

Brigham Young University (BYU), Integrating Engineering Theory and Practicum Within Interactive Asynchronous Courses, 2000. From the ASME Curriculum Innovation Award information. The complete report is available at http://www.asme.org/education/enged/awards/cia00/raisor.pdf

Dr. Katrina A. Meyer Does Policy Make a Difference? An Exploration into Policies for Distance Education Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration Winter 2002 - Volume V, Number 4 A copy is available at http://www.westga.edu/%7Edistance/ojdla/winter54/Meyer_policy_54.htm

Chute, Alan G., Hancock, Burton W., and Balthazar, Lee B. 1991. "Distance Education

Futures: Information Needs and Technology Options." Performance & Instruction.

November/December).

IDE 1996. Models of Distance Education. University of Maryland Institute for Distance

Education. World Wide Web: http://www.umuc.edu/ide/modlmenu.html#overview

CHAPTER III

METHODOLGY OF STUDY

To complete a study about Distant Learning and its use and effectiveness on courses accredited through the Accredited Board of Engineering and Technology (ABET), there are many factors to consider. These factors include many basics, such as faculty training, delivery methods, student results, effectiveness of the educational process, and other items.

One of the first considerations is the ABET accreditation itself. A review of the ABET Accreditation Policy and Procedure Manual, Effective for Evaluations During the 2002-2003 Accreditation Cycle, shows many variables in the accreditation process. Each institution is allowed a certain variable or leeway in conducting its educational programs. Those variables are then weighed against the policies of ABET, and the institution is then deemed to have complied and receives the ABET accreditation.

Of specific interest is that distant education or distance learning is not even addressed in the most recent ABET Accreditation Policy and Procedure Manual. Somewhat surprisingly, ABET does not specifically address the many issues encompassing Distant Learning.

The ABET manual does address specific evaluations to take place during an on-site visit to the institution being examined for accreditation. While Distant Learning programs are not specifically evaluated under special criteria, course work offered via a Distant Learning delivery program must meet regular ABET specific criteria. From the ABET manual, those specifics are listed below:

II.E.3.c.(10) Representative samples of student work that reveal the spectrum of educational outcome. In order to make a qualitative evaluation of a program, it is necessary that the institution exhibit teaching materials such as course outlines and textbooks for all courses required for graduation. Sufficient examples of student work in technical, mathematics, and science courses must be available to the visiting team for the entire campus visit. The examples should show a range of grades for assignments, including homework, quizzes, examinations, drawings, laboratory reports, projects, and samples of computer usage in technical courses. Examples must also be presented to demonstrate compliance with the requirement for student competence in written and oral communications.

II.E.3.c.(11) Records of employment of graduates and, as appropriate, passage rates on nationally normed examinations to evaluate placement and performance in terms of the goals stated for each program.

II.E.3.c.(12) Student support services appropriate to the educational and career needs of the students. These include registration; tutoring; career and academic advisement; library, computing, and laboratory resources; and additional services appropriate to the institution's and program's mission and educational objectives. Student services must be sufficient to support the program, and there must be evidence of their use.

II.E.3.c.(13) Clearly stated expectations for learning and student achievement appropriate to the mission and educational objectives of the institution and program. Academic policies relating to student, such as admissions, probation, dismissal, grievances, and graduation requirements must be fair, equitable, and published. If academic policies for the program are different from or in addition to the institution's, those differences must be clearly stated. The criteria used by faculty to evaluate student work must be equitable, consistently applied, and clearly articulated to students, faculty, and staff.

It is clear that each Distant Learning program must meet this aforementioned ABET criteria in order to maintain its accreditation. So any effective study or survey must keep this criteria in play as the methodology is developed, and executed.

Distant Learning continues to evolve. The plan of reproducing or automating the classroom feeds directly into a preference for video. Video, delivered via television or data streams with computer connections, seems to offer the closest equivalent to the actual classroom experience. Administrators of higher institutions may acquire expensive video-based tools, and wrongly believe that faculty members can simply pick them up and start using them. To do so is naive and foolish. In the business world, training employees to use new equipment often costs more than buying the hardware and software itself. Faculty should not be expected to adapt to new technology and delivery methods by simply throwing the technology at them and expecting consistant results. The study must consider the effects of the technology, the amount of training faculty received and continues to receive, and the quality of that training or educational experience. Because of the variety of delivery methods available, one set standard of faculty training cannot be expected or evaluated. The adequacy of the training of the faculty must be measured by the faculties' ability to deliver Distant Learning courses effectively to the student.

There are significant problems still associated with the concept of distance learning. This past decade has witnessed the widespread development of distance learning courses. The marketplace seems to be driving the demand for the continued development and offerings of these courses. These courses, whether offered via television or online, affect the work in the classroom. Faculty will find this particularly true with regard to class size and course preparation.

Enrollment in a course that is delivered in a Distance Learning offering is not limited by room size or other physical facility usage. Increased weekly student contact hours or class size directly affects the ability of the faculty to evaluate examinations and written assignments. Although on the surface, increased student contact seems like a fortunate thing to the education process. But the increased contact can play havoc on the faculty. Currently there is no established standard regarding the appropriate size of classes taught in the distance-learning mode.

The study should consider the quality of the educational experience based on the class size, and the faculty's ability to respond to student needs. The study should develop data that would determine maximum student population per faculty for Distant Learning courses. Just as classroom sizes are currently limited because of physical facility usage, the same must be done for Distant Learning course offerings, which is not effected by the physical size of any facility. Somewhere, there is an obvious breaking point. The study must determine how to measure where that breaking point is, and make specific recommendations as to the maximum class size. By not doing so, it is possible to not follow ABET accreditation standards.

Class size or increased weekly student contact hours can also affect those courses that are designated as interactive on the part of instructor and student. Such courses require instructors to commit significant amounts of additional time to telephone conferences or e-mail exchanges. The various structures of Distance Learning add to the preparation requirements of the course faculty. Distance Learning requires faculty to develop and maintain significant expertise and preparation in technical areas apart from traditional academic education. The Distance Learning faculty must have specific knowledge and training of particular computer software programs used in Distance Learning courses as well as knowledge of television studio procedures if the course is televised by the university. It appears that some colleges, under the banner of faculty development, now are requiring faculty to undergo special technical and performance training before teaching in Distance Learning programs. This new trend makes sense. It should help an institution to maintain ABET accreditation. The survey and study should determine if faculty members are receiving this type of training from their currently accredited university.

Distance Learning courses often require greater preparation on the part of the faculty for each class session than is typical for the standard or typical lecture class. Equipment and tools available to faculty during the actual course time should also be determined and evaluated. For example, it is assumed that every classroom where a typical lecture class is presented has been equipped with a chalkboard or wipe board, which allows the instructor to enhance a lecture or presentation at any point necessary. This allows clearer responses to student questions or inquiries, and often allows for faster comprehension among visual learners when new material is presented. Most distance learning television studios are not equipped with traditional chalkboards, and faculty members must prepare written materials suitable for the camera and electronic transmission rather than writing spontaneously on the chalkboard. They may also have to master a new piece of equipment, such as an electronic chalkboard that would allow the student to see an electronic version of the same thing that would have been written on a traditional chalkboard. Not only would the faculty need to learn to use this new piece of equipment, but would also need to know how to broadcast the image effectively during the lecture.

Another important area to address in the study is the manner faculty is using to evaluate student performance. Distance Learning courses often necessitate the alteration of the manner the faculty uses to assess the student's performance. Faculty is required to postpone their immediate, real-time assessment of student performance within a traditional classroom, in favor of a later telephone conversation or an e-mail letter. Often this communication from the student is received at a later time or date. Student assessment in Distance Learning courses also becomes problematic because the instructor cannot observe the student in the classroom. This is particularly important in those courses in which a direct observation of the student by the instructor is the optimum situation.

The study or survey must include consideration for this issue. In order to maintain ABET accreditation, student involvement must be constantly measured. (See ABET manual Section II.E.3.c.(10)).

Formal examinations must be restructured in Distance Learning courses. In order to accommodate students that are enrolled at off-campus sites or who are viewing the course on television or over the Internet, considerations must be given as to how the formal examination is given to the student. If the examination is a traditional paper exam, its simple delivery to distant students could be problematic. If it is to be delivered via a Web environment, it would require faculty preparation in a different format. The regular chapter quizzes, for example, which are often used in traditional lecture courses by the instructor to encourage students to maintain their reading assignments, are not often practical in distance learning courses. As easily apparent, it is clear that the faculty must spend additional preparation time resolving problems pertaining to student test assessment and progress evaluation. This is critical to maintain the current ABET accreditation.

Distance Learning courses also affect faculty timelines. Many times, faculty are accustomed to distributing materials in class. But the faculty assigned to teach a Distant Learning course must prepare materials in advance. Those materials must be mailed to the Distance Learning students enrolled in interactive televised courses in anticipation of the class activity for a particular day. Failing to do so could result in jeopardizing the ABET accreditation. (See ABET Manual Section II.E.3.c.(10)). In the televised courses, faculty must also spend additional preparation time working with technical and support staff in order to ensure that the class occurs in a smooth and uninterrupted manner. The study should determine if faculty has been given the necessary time, and if so, if the faculty is effectively using that time to deliver the Distant Learning course. It should be understood and accepted that while, in some ways, the delivery of material is technically easier in online or recorded courses, the outstanding fact remains that material preparation is significantly different for Distance Learning courses. Faculty must be evaluated on their ability to adapt to the new delivery method requirements, and their ability to deliver the necessary supporting documents required. It should be noted that it is common practice for faculty to be asked to deliver the same course in both a traditional lecture format, as well as a Distant Learning format. Whatever the context or specific situation, the faculty must often prepare for multiple student audiences simultaneously. It is common for the instructor to be preparing for a class in the traditional classroom and the other by Distance Learning. Evaluation in the study should be done of both sets of materials. It should be studied if the Faculty is simply making Distant Learning materials "fit" rather than redevelop to the media.

Materials should be evaluated for the media. Different styles should be used for traditional classroom lecture presentation, Web presentation, and delivery through interactive television. Not only does the material need to be checked and evaluated, it also needs to be ascertained if the style is acceptable to media used to disseminate the information.

As Distant Learning continues to be offered at ABET accredited universities, it is important to evaluate the faculties' ability to mold their courses to the necessities of the new media. Distant Learning instruction is different than a classroom lecture instruction, and faculty must adapt their methodology to prevent jeopardizing the ABET accreditation.

The study must measure the real effectiveness of the new technologies in older learning models. Not only is the technology to be measured, but the ability of the current faculty to adapt to its use, and still maintain the standard required of the ABET accreditation.

We have these wonderful new communication and computer technologies and our instructional programs are in the midst of dramatic changes in the classroom," said Robert Threlkeld, Dean of Learning and Technology and Director of the Academic Innovation Center at California State University, Fresno. He was quoted in October, 1995, when Michigan State celebrated the completion of its Kellogg Foundation grant with a capstone symposium designed to focus on institutional strategies to strengthen and more fully integrate outreach as a fundamental element of the university's overall academic mission. "The problem is we're taking this new technology and trying to chase the classroom experience - to adapt and expand the technologies to the classroom. We're trying to extend and replicate the classroom electronically. We may be trying to stretch the new technology to fit an old model."

Attempting to fit the new technology to the old classroom model concerned many who attended that earlier session. It was reported that several audience members noted that they were troubled by the possibility of a diminished quality of education for students in the classroom because teachers have to be concerned that the technology is working properly for distant learners. In addition, many educators expressed concern that they cannot nurture students in distant classrooms.

Those key points are important considerations, and should not be overlooked as mere passing comments by experienced educators. These comments should be at the root of the study, and seriously considered as key elements of the final goal of the study. What these professors expressed at the symposium should be carefully considered and implemented. The fact that the new technology has been thrust on the faculty, with spotty or irregular support and direction, should be an essential element reviewed in the study.

To begin the study, a review of current literature is in order. The Teacher Service Scholar Model sparked interest in the area of distance learning accountability. DeSpain, Heeney, and Livingston (l998, p. 3) presented research suggesting that even Deans of Colleges of Education offered that there "does not appear to be a great deal of consistency among institutions in the treatment of nontraditional activities, even to the extent of what should be considered a scholarly publication." This research takes in, among other things, the apparent confusion of "how to treat, in the promotion and tenure issues," materials and activities developed and created for Distance Learning instructional models (DeSpain, Heeney, & Livingston, 1998).

The further analysis on this subject elicits broad wide-ranging areas of study. Themes that are significant in the published material include copyright issues and ownership of distance learning materials and courses, increased effectiveness of teaching methodology in distance learning models, faculty and student attitudes relative to distance learning, jurisdiction and/or accountability for accreditation of distance learning instruction, and cost-effectiveness of distance learning models.

In the Summer 2001 - Volume IV, Number 2 issue of Online Journal of Distance Learning Journal, Judy Johnson, Ed.D., Assistant Professor, Southwest Missouri State University, and Dr. B.C. DeSpain, Dean, College of Education and Behavioral Sciences, University of Tennessee - Martin, Martin, Tennessee, published a study on the subject in their article, Policies and Practices in the Utilization of Interactive Television and Web-Based Delivery Models in Public Universities. Both Johnson and Dean concluded that "The response rate indicated the strong interest in this area of study. Distance education is now an integral part of both the undergraduate and graduate educational program. Training and staff development are vital components of effective distance learning instruction."

The professors added, "These are being offered by most universities, but additional training should be considered with emphasis on distance learning techniques. Usage agreements and ownership guarantees are not generally in current practice. Policies are becoming more precise, but the general view is that policy development and accepted practices are still extremely nebulous. Copyright issues and ownership of developed materials are issues that need to be addressed. Distance learning, ITV and online models, increases instructor demands. Compensation and/or release time are not typically provided to the distance learning instructors despite the increased expectations. While Deans of Colleges of Education feel the instructors are competent to handle the technology, the literature does not support this view. Professors are working to become technologically competent, but still feel additional training and support are needed. The purposes of offering distance learning courses are fairly obvious. Realization of a changing society and the subsequent transition to a diverse consumer pool, service/enrollment, competition, and interest of professors are the primary focus of the distance learning instructional model."

The research design the authors used comprised the following research format: The survey was divided into two major sections representing the distance learning areas of interactive television and online (web-based) instructional models. The research document consisted of a forty-three (43) question survey, which included one open-ended response item.

Johnson and Dean tested the initial survey tool with a select group of College of Education and Extended Learning administrators. The final survey instrument was mailed to all Deans of Colleges of Education at public universities in thirteen (13) mid-western states (total one hundred ten (110) surveys). The professors concluded that the return of ninety (90) of one hundred ten (110) instruments from a single mailing attests to the high interest level on this topic. (The actual return of the ninety (90) survey instruments signifies an eighty-two percent (82%) response rate. Johnson and Dean used eighty-three (83) of the surveys in their final tabulation).

Seventy percent (70%) of the respondents reported that their college did offer coursework via the Interactive Television (ITV) format. The other thirty percent (30%) of the participants noted that this was not a method currently used. When questioned if the university's professors that taught the ITV courses volunteered or were assigned, seventy-six percent (76%) stated that professors volunteered for the assignment while twenty-four percent (24%) indicated that the positions were not necessarily filled on a voluntary basis. When asked as to whether newly hired professors were expected to teach via ITV, sixty-one percent (61%) responded yes while thirty-nine percent (39%) answered the survey negatively. Johnson and Dean questioned if the current faculty could decline to teach via the ITV, seventy-eight percent (78%) responded yes that professors could decline, while twenty-two percent (22%) indicated that refusing to teach via ITV was not an option.

Fifty-nine percent (59%) of the respondents stated that the professor remained at the sending site, while thirty-nine percent (39%) indicated that the professor did not always remain at the main campus site. An interesting note is that the class size was typically controlled at both the broadcast site and the off-campus locations by the majority of the institutions (78%). The enrollment sizes of the classes ranged from five (5) to fifty (50) students at both the broadcast and off-site classes. The largest number of respondents (36%) indicated that the typical class maximum for both on and off-site would be about twenty (20) students. It would be most interesting to drill down this data further and determine the actual student participation and the complete results from these different class sizes.

The data is summarized in Table I.

Variable

Yes (by percentage)

No (by percentage)

Range

Institution offer course work via ITV

Professors volunteer for teaching assignment

New professors hired with understanding to teach ITV

6l.3

Professors may decline ITV teaching assignment

Primary instructor remain at sending site

Control size of classes

2l.7

Maximum enrollment

10-20 typical (Range from l -50)

Tables of ITV Responses

General Information

Johnson and Dean probed the issue of training and professional development for faculty working with ITV. Their survey revealed that sixty-seven percent (67%) of the respondents provide such training. The scope and frequency of training ranged from one (l) to fifteen plus (l5+) hours. Surprisingly the greatest number of participants (54%) indicated that faculty training opportunities typically ranged from two (2) to four (4) hours. It seems that the faculty training issue needs further study. From the Johnson and Dean survey, on the surface it would appear that the amount of training the faculty received would be inadequate.

Professors Johnson and Dean said that the literature about teaching via distance learning models may require extensive preparation and additional time requirements. They did ask questions related to these issues, and they were able to elicit remarkable data with regard to time allotments in relation to increased work demands.

When considering release time for ITV course preparation, only twenty-eight percent (28%) of the responding institutions provided release time prior to the semester in which the course was taught and thirty-nine percent (39%) during the semester in which the course was taught. Only thirty-nine percent (39%) of the responding institutions offered additional compensation for teaching ITV. Less than half (44%) of the institutions increased tuition for students enrolling in the ITV courses. This data is summarized in Table II.

Variable

Yes (by percentage)

No (by percentage)

Range

Professors teaching via ITV provided release time

Release time - prior to semester in which course is taught

6.l5

Release time - during the semester in which course is taught

3l.3

Professors given extra compensation/consideration

Tuition increase to students enrolling in ITV coursework

Financial Issues/Faculty Compensation

According to Johnson and Dean, the respondents to their survey reported that they considered the professors teaching via the online model to be competent and technologically literate sixty-two percent (62%) of the time. Ninety-two percent (92%) of the respondents also said that technical support was provided. This does not align, necessarily, with the literature review that indicated some concern regarding the training and technical support issues (Austin, l999; DeSpain, Heeney, Livingston, l998; Trier, l995). These results are reported in Table III.

Variable

Yes (by percentage)

No (by percentage)

Range

Professors develop/teach online generally technologically literate and competent to handle details

6l.7

Professors develop/teach online are provided technical support

9l.5

Technical Assistance and Training

Professors Johnson and Dean questioned the respondents about faculty compensation. According to the authors, faculty compensation or consideration was mentioned as a possible area of concern by faculty involved in the distance learning initiative (Hereford, 2000; NEA Report, 2000; Trier, l995). Forty-two percent (42%) of the respondents indicated that there was some form of monetary and/or other consideration given for the distance learning teaching assignment. Fifty-eight percent (58%), indicated that there was no consideration given for the non-traditional instructional model. These results were in keeping with the recent NEA study, which stated that sixty-three percent (63%) of their respondents did not receive additional compensation and eighty-four percent (84%) received no reduction in course load. Completing the section on financial issues, participants were asked if increased costs associated with the distance learning format were passed onto the students in the form of tuition increases. The majority of respondents indicated that tuition increases were not yet a customary part of the distance learning model. Forty-two percent (42%) indicated that tuition costs were increased with fifty-eight percent (58%) stating there was no tuition increase. It should be noted that of the institutions responding in the affirmative to the tuition increase, thirty-four percent (34%) of those were at the graduate level only.

The authors of this study used the last four (4) questions presented on the research instrument as a rank order and for an individual notation of information. The last question requested information relative to innovative practices being implemented with the technology-related courses. Johnson and Dean reported that as an open-ended response, the data were analyzed and combined into broad similarities. The results of this area of questioning is summarized on Table IV.

Variable

Yes (by percentage)

No (by percentage)

Range

Professors teaching online receive extra compensation

4l.9

58.l

Professors teaching online receive release time

4l.9

58.l

If provided, release time prior to the semester in which the course is taught

If provided, release time during the semester in which the course is taught

Tuition increase for online instructional model na (34%-tuition increase at graduate level)

Rank order/information on reasons for offering online course delivery

No statistical difference

Primary Response:

Recognition of changing needs of consumer pool Providing service to current students who request great options to courses Meeting efforts of competitors, thereby keeping current student population

Secondary Response:

Genuine commitment to the idea that this is a good way to teach college courses Professors want to teach that way Building enrollment by gaining new students

Department/fund revenue generated from online courses allotted

Primary Response:

Regular academic program

Secondary Response:

Divide between regular academic program, College of Education, Extended Learning / Continuing Education

Analyzing this data gathered by Professors Johnson and Dean, the results of this survey of Deans of Colleges of Education are not completely consistent with what the literature indicated has been common practice. It is probably that the technology is making changes so rapidly that published literature cannot keep pace with the ever-changing world of Distant Learning. It would appear that the Administration of Universities, and perhaps ABET accreditation itself, is not keeping up with the rapid changes offered through Distance Learning. It certainly appears that additional research is needed.

There is going to be variables in any study, because of the different types of technology being utilized today. The survey instrument itself could easily be misunderstood or improperly comprehended due to the respondent attempting to "fit" answers to questions based on the equipment being utilized. It may seem appropriate to modify the survey to the technology being deployed.

The method of the data collection could also slant data. When using multiple choice answers, the tendency may be to select the "best" answer rather than the actual answer. Consideration must be given to the method of collecting the data from the respondents.

Because of the various institutions currently accredited by ABET, the collection of the data could be time consuming. It may be nearly impossible to get an accurate data collection by only using a sampling of the currently accredited schools and universities. It seems best to directly survey the accredited schools, and not use a methodology of a sampling of representative institutions. It is also quite possible that by the time a survey is developed, advances in technology could make the survey obsolete, or force the responding universities to be making changes in their programs.