Learning at a Distance

(Walden University EDUC 6135)

What I Thought I Knew

Before this course, I would define distance learning as any educational interaction that does not include “in-class” activities. This could be synchronous or asynchronous, web-based, or mail-order. In my opinion, all of those were distance learning since it was not in an actual building. When my children were in elementary school, we loved to try out new “educational games. Two of our favorites were The Oregon Trail and The Magic School Bus. I certainly considered them educational, but I would not have thought of them as “distance education” since there was no exchange of information or classwork with an instructor. For reference, my children engaged in these activities when only about 11% of instructional content could be considered distance education (Clark & Mayer, 2023). I think I can be excused for my misunderstanding of what that term entailed.

What I Learned

History

This week, I learned about the much deeper history of “distance education,” beginning with the correspondence courses I was already familiar with. I was unaware they had a history dating back to my great-great-grandfather’s days.  It is reasonable that remnants of correspondence courses exist today, as some students lack electronic connections to others. I live in an area heavily populated with Amish and Mennonite families. These learners eschew modern technology to varying degrees. They would not be able to pursue many educational opportunities relevant to their lives if it were not for distance learning of this sort. I am also reminded of the beginning stages of the pandemic mitigation when economically disadvantaged students or students in remote rural areas had no access to high-speed internet.  While many urban districts began using buses as mobile hotpots (Ekbatani, 2020; Wolfman-Arent, 2020), the students in remote areas of northern Pennsylvania did not have that option. Correspondence courses are a valuable resource for them.

Theories

I also learned some of the theories of distance education, including Wedemeyer and Moore’s theories of independent study (Simonson et al., 2019). I see in those theories the beginning building blocks of Universal Design for Learning and Human Performance Technology as it relates to instructional design. The learner-focused characteristics and emphasis on autonomy are mirrored in the flexibility and inclusivity of UDL (Burgstahler, 2021; Rao, 2021). Holmberg’s guided didactic conversation and his broadened theory of distance education, especially its acceptance of many modes of learning (Simonson et al., 2019), also hearken to the interconnected systems approach of HPT, where many options are considered (ISPI, 2009). I will admit to being a bit put off by Peters’ “view of distance education as an industrialized form of teaching and learning” (Simonson et al., 2019, p. 45). Learners are not standardized, so the instruction we design for them must be adaptable and nimble in its flexibility.

The Future as I See It

Flexibility

My vision of the future of distance education is rooted in that flexibility, with sound frameworks to enhance learner motivation. Informal and connected experiences that allow for constructivist principles (Siemens, 2004) will give learners autonomy and social interaction and maintain learner-focused instruction. As my field is rooted in andragogy, autonomy must be a key portion of any learning activity I design. Adult learners pull from diverse experiences and prior education that can be accounted for with well-designed materials. Self-directed, experiential, and project-based learning are all well-suited to distance education and are key areas where adult learners find satisfaction and success in continued instruction (Conlan et al., 2003). This can include a variety of interfaces, including “Zoom Rooms, MOOCS (while not generally classified as true distance education), or e-learning modules hosted on internal learning management systems. Learners will benefit the most when they can not only engage in rich multimedia content but also interact with each other in the process (Moreillon, 2015).

Learner Satisfaction and Success

Keller developed the ARCS Model of Motivation in the 1980s, and it holds true today and will enhance the experience of distance learners of all ages. The ARCS model, like HPT, relies on needs and learner analysis (Keller, 1999) and incorporates motivational objectives alongside desired instructional outcomes. While Keller initially envisioned this model to be used in classroom education, the four dimensions of attention, relevance, confidence, and satisfaction can be easily applied to distance education, especially when working with adult learners. The use of motivational messages and check-ins results in higher retention rates. Providing clear expectations, learner autonomy, and challenging yet attainable activities will build confidence in the learner during the instructional activity and also in the performance of the tasks following instruction (Huett et al., 2008).

Final Thoughts

Distance education began as a mail-order affair, allowing global learners to connect to content. Over the decades, technological advancements have permitted distance education to become the interactive multimedia experience we see daily in LMS and internet sites. Regardless of the modality, successful distance education relies on learner-first, dynamic construction that incorporates sound principles of instructional design and learning theories. Anything else is an over-produced video game and potentially a waste of designers’ and learners’ time, money, and talent.

References

Burgstahler, S. (2021). What Higher Education Learned About the Accessibility of Online Opportunities During a Pandemic. Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice, 21(7), Article 7. https://articlearchives.co/index.php/JHETP/article/view/3002

Clark, R. C., & Mayer, R. E. (2023). e-Learning and the Science of Instruction: Proven Guidelines for Consumers and Designers of Multimedia Learning. John Wiley & Sons.

Conlan, J., Grabowski, S., & Smith, K. (2003). Adult learning. Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology, 115-126.

Ekbatani, T. (2020, April 8). School Bus Wi-Fi Hotspots Aide Student Learning During COVID-19 Closures. School Transportation News. https://stnonline.com/special-reports/school-bus-wi-fi-hotspots-aide-student-learning-during-covid-19-closures/

Huett, J. B., Moller, L., Young, J., Bray, M., & Huett, K. C. (2008). Supporting the distant student: The effect of ARCS-based strategies on confidence and performance. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 9(2), 113.

ISPI. (2009). International Society for Performance Improvement. What is Human Performance Technology (HPT)? International Society for Performance Improvement. All rights reserved. Used with Permission.

Keller, J. M. (1999). Using the ARCS motivational process in computer‐based instruction and distance education. New directions for teaching and learning, 1999(78), 37-47.

Moreillon, J. (2015). Increasing interactivity in the online learning environment: Using digital tools to support students in socially constructed meaning-making. TechTrends, 59, 41-47.

Rao, K. (2021). Inclusive instructional design: Applying UDL to online learning. The Journal of Applied Instructional Design, 10(1), 1–10. https://edtechbooks.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/pdfs/223/3753.pdf

Siemens, G. (2004). Elearnspace. Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. Elearnspace.org, 14-16.

Simonson, M., Zvacek, S., & Smaldino, S. (2019). Teaching and learning at a distance: Foundations of distance education (7th ed.) Information Age Publishing.

Wolfman-Arent, A. (2020, April 2). Coronavirus shutdown reveals inequity of student internet access across pa. Coronavirus Pandemic. https://whyy.org/articles/coronavirus-shutdown-reveals-inequity-of-student-internet-access-across-pa/