• Embed Doc
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • 1
    CommentGo Back
Download
 
The 10
th
Cambridge International Conference on Open and Distance Education Keynote PresentationSeptember 26
th
2003: Professor Mary Thorpe, Director IET, UK Open University
Continual Reinvention: The future for open and distance learning
Abstract
The use of ICT in all forms of education and training renders it more difficult than ever before, todistinguish the distance from the non-distance sector of provision. However, there continues toexist a range of social contexts requiring the systems capabilities of distance educators in bringingeffective opportunities to learners in both technology-poor as well as technology- richenvironments. For this reason alone therefore, a thriving community of distance educators willcontinue to exist for some years to come. The paper however argues that we should also see thefuture of ODE in terms of innovation informed by the most challenging ideas and new directions,whatever their origin. Examples from two areas are discussed - pedagogies for learningcommunities, and technologies for reusability and portability in resources for learning. Both theseareas are generating developments that put distance education at the forefront of innovation andenable it to ‘speak to’ the interests of many who do not consider themselves as distance educators.The future does not consist in focusing on what makes distance education different, but on ensuringthat it cannot be ignored, because it continues to work with the latest and the best ideas, about both pedagogy and technology. In this sense, distance education has to continually reinvent itself, byapplying new ideas that will probably not have originated in the field, but which can be adapted toit and invigorate its practice. It is still a field that distinguishes itself by taking what is at theforefront of thinking and making it work for real learners, not merely in pilot projects and researchlaboratories.
Introduction
Addressing the issue of the future of open and distance learning tends to raise the question of whatcounts as open and distance education. As many have already pointed out, there has been awidespread adoption of the use of information and communication technology (ICT) in all forms of education and training. These technologies are also being actively promoted. Within Europe, theSixth Framework Programme Information Society Technologies area includes funding themes for mobile user applications and what it terms ‘e-inclusion’. The objectives of this are to ‘promote e-inclusion as a core horizontal building block in the establishment of the Information Society toensure equal access and participation for all in Europe and to develop intelligent systems thatempower persons with disabilities and ageing citizens to play a full role in society and to increasetheir autonomy.’The European Commission’s Web-edu project carried out regional analyses of the use of e-Learning Learning Management Systems and discovered rapid growth in their use, particularly inthe Nordic countries . About a third of the 89 institutions in the study offered at least 50 coursesonline, and locally developed systems are more likely to be used than BlackBoard and WebCT incountries where English is not the first language. Many learners now study using resources other than direct contact with their teachers, and at sites remote from their campus. However suchlearners and their institutions do not necessarily think of themselves as involved in distanceeducation. As the report authors note: ‘
 In most cases online education is used as a help and addition to the traditional face-to-face education
.'’
1
 
The terms ‘open’ and ‘distance’ probably achieved their high watermark as a magnet for  practitioners on the conference circuits of the eighties and early nineties. Since then, we have seenthe rise of terms such as elearning, mlearning and the variants yet to come. In his 2002 report titled‘The future of learning: from eLearning to mLearning’ Desmond Keegan revisits terminology anddefinitions for distance education. He seeks refuge in what he terms ‘legalistic differences’ betweenthe distance and the non-distance sector:
 A distance student has not contracted to join a community hosted at an institution, whereas aconventional student – however she or he studies for their award – has crucially signed up to join a place and a community
.’ (Keegan, 2002)However I doubt that even this distinction will still hold. Many distance education students now do join a community of other students, though not to study at a particular location. The StudentsAssociation of the UK Open University for example, has a conference for every course, anduniversity-wide conferences for social functions of chat, FAQs, access to services and so on. MostCourse Teams also now provide specialist course conferences in addition. It is the University’sdeliberate intention that students do feel part of a community , and that now also includes access tothe OU Library from home. Students can develop their IT skills and information search capabilitiesvia online supported study developed by the OU Library, and many courses offer guidedintroductions to the web-based resources relevant to different disciplines . Where studentship isconcerned, there seems every reason to allow virtual communities to count, just as much as face toface communities.But we probably should not be too concerned about defining ourselves as a distinct sector. In practical terms, some of our leading authors simply ignore the issue, or choose to focus on other aspects. Terry Evans and Daryl Nation for example, in their book Changing University Teaching, published in 2000, foreground the theme of creating educational technologies in universitycontexts. The various chapters use case studies of distance education to focus on themes whichconnect the practice with a much broader educational sector than just distance educators. There is alesson here I think in presentation. If we want the world to be interested in what we are doing, weneed to present what we do in terms of themes and sectors of interest that we share with those whowould not describe themselves as distance educators or trainers. Currently it seems to me now verydifficult indeed to identify distance education as a distinct sub-sector of practice, bearing in mindthe way in which information and communication technologies are being used by all manor of organizations, including many campus-based institutions . Notwithstanding this point, there is still a need in many areas of the world, for the classic expertiseof distance educators in delivering access and flexible learning opportunities. I would define this interms of systems and capabilities for effective delivery to learners, particularly adult learners, whowould otherwise have no opportunity to participate in education. Mozambique for example hasdecided to invest in training a cadre of distance educators who will operate across their countrythrough local centres for distance education which will provide the only opportunity for learning toadults who live much too far from conventional provision to benefit from it. Distance education iscurrently a hugely diverse set of practices therefore, encompassing provision that might not bemuch different from that of the eighties, to provision that is state of the art in terms of online andmobile technology applications .However the issue is to speculate on the rather longer term future and what form that might take.The only viable future I can envisage for distance education is one of continual innovation – hencethe injunction to keep reinventing ourselves as the field of practice that is always operating at the
2
 
 boundary, and leading educational thinking. What distance education has to do is to earn theinterest of those both in and outside our field, by continually demonstrating that we are at theforefront not just of innovative thinking but
 putting that thinking into practical effect 
. What madeus the theme of conference circuits in the eighties and early nineties, was precisely that we weredoing things that nobody else was doing outside of distance education. We were taking learning tonew people and new places. But now everybody has to be concerned about access and partnershipsfor progression. Certainly all UK universities have to demonstrate a practical commitment toaccess whatever methods they use to deliver it, so that flexibility, access, openness and so on, nolonger distinguish distance education from the rest.Happily I see every likelihood that distance educators will continue to gain the interest of our peersoutside the field, through innovative educational practice that is of interest to all sectors, not just todistance educators. I intend to support that assertion by looking at innovatory practice in two areas:in a) pedagogy and the development of learning communities, and b) digital technologies for creation of reusable, flexible and portable resources.
Pedagogy and the Development of learning communities
Theorists of learning have converged around social constructivist approaches to learning as theframework within which to develop appropriate pedagogies. The work of Vygotsky, Berger andLuckmann, Brown and Duguid among others, has been influential in moving educators generallytowards a view that learning is about understanding and engagement by the learner in an active process of constructing meaning . The social context of learners has been recognised as crucial tothe learning process. Knowledge and capability develop through the use of language and throughinteraction with others in social activity. This has been taken a stage further in Lave and Wenger’sanalysis of practice communities, where learning the practice and becoming a recognised member of the community are achieved through the same process. Newcomers have a legitimate role ‘on the periphery’, and gradually take on more and more of the language, conventions and functions of those at the heart of the practice . Although their analysis was not intended to define a new strategyfor teaching and learning, it has helped to generate a widespread interest in creating learningcommunities through online study. It is also stimulating a ‘communities of practice’ approach to the preparation and in-service development of professionals.There have always been critics of distance education, who make quality of learning the focus for their criticisms. It used to be the charge that distance education students were ‘spoon-fed’ and couldonly develop the lower quality learning of memorisation. That was the charge, but the use of  pedagogies based on reflection, project work, and continuous assessment with detailed and personalfeedback, were just some of the ways in which from the beginning, distance education has always been able to counter that charge and deliver high quality learning. We have effectivelydemonstrated that our students achieve a critical grasp of knowledge the equal of their peers oncampus.At its best, distance education has led the field in terms of pedagogy and learning quality. It has pioneered approaches to assessment for example, such as clarity about criteria and extensivefeedback, that are still leading edge and not universally adopted across mainstream campus-based provision. It is not surprising therefore that the current emphasis on social constructivist approachesto learning is led by educators using online teaching, many if not all, working within distanceeducation.
3
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
03 / 17 / 2011<span class="translation_missing">en_US, this_document_made_it_onto_the</span>Rising List!
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...