Three Issues in Distance Learning

As doctoral degree candidates in the Instructional Technology and Distance Education (ITDE) degree program, at Nova Southeastern University, we have been consistently taught and challenged to reflect on trends and issues related to distance education.

The curriculum offers specific courses related to this topic, as well as other courses, that indirectly asks the student about connections to issues and trends related to distance education. We have found that there are several consistent issues, and concerning them, significant steps to take to address these issues.

This article discusses three specific issues: the digital divide, academic dishonesty, and transactional distance learning theory. Each issue in this article is introduced and explained, the issue is discussed as related to distance learning, and specific steps are identified to reduce or embrace the issue to leverage distance learning to its capacity.

The computer and the Internet have opened a vast array of opportunities and have stimulated unprecedented growth over the past decade or two. Yet, there are still large sectors of Americans that are excluded from enjoying these opportunities. Pearson (2002) gives her interpretation of what has come to be known as the “digital divide” as a separation between those who have access to and can effectively use technology and those in our society who have access to and cannot use technology effectively.

This issue is coming to the forefront with the increasing numbers of schools, in both K-12 and higher education, that are transforming to a wireless environment or who require students to have access to laptop computers. Although students may have access to the Internet at school, this does not necessarily ensure that they will have access at home. Also, there remains considerable disparity in access to computers in schools, between the rich and the poor and between Whites and ethnic minorities (Pearson, 2002). A report from the National Center for Education Statistics (cited in Pearson) found that in schools with a minority population greater than 50%, only 37% of the instructional rooms have computers, compared to 57% of instructional rooms in schools with a minority population less than 6%.

According to Pearson (2002), American society is entering a time when there is a new type of inequality. Those individuals that have access to, and can effectively use computers have access to more information than at any other time in our history. However, a substantial portion of the population is being left behind. Leaders in ITDE must insure that technology does not expand the divide between the “haves” and the “have nots.”

There are core community values that become elusive as part of the digital divide: (1) participation in the civic life of the community, (2) collaboration in problem solving, and (3) a sense of being connected. In order for communities to survive and prosper, each member of the community must feel connected to the community. Instead of technology helping to unite the community, it can cause separation within the community and between communities if there is inadequate access to—and ineffective use of— technology (National Telecommunications and Information Administration, NTIA, 2000).

Those individuals who are among the “haves” take for granted the ubiquity of the Internet; it is everywhere, and most of the

“haves” take for granted the ease of accessibility, especially of highspeed connections in the workplace, in schools, in libraries, and even in a growing number of homes. But, for the “have nots,” even basic connectivity is a substantial barrier to become part of the information society (NTIA, 2001). As suggested by Pearson (2002), the first step in bridging the divide is for leaders in ITDE to realize that not everyone benefits from the advances in technology that are taking place in our society.

Steps must be taken on the local, as well as national level to ensure that all members of society have equal access to technology. One example of community-building through the use of technology, as reviewed by Pearson, is the College Reach-Out Program (CROP), which is a collaborative effort of Central Florida Community College, Santa Fe Community College, and the University of Florida (all mid-Florida institutions). The purpose of CROP is to expose disadvantaged students to innovative projects that help them realize the importance of computers and technology and how access to—and effective use of— technology can benefit them now and in the future.

The digital divide is an issue that requires constant review and evaluation by all those involved in instructional technology and distance education. In order for the disparity between the “haves” and the “have nots” to be erased, or in the least narrowed, it requires a concerted effort on the part of all individuals and organizations that deal with computers and technology on a day-to-day basis. The growth and survival of our vital infrastructures, social, economic, and educational, depends on our insistence on insuring opportunities of access to technology to all members of society.

A student sits down at a computer to complete an essay assignment for an online course. She is struggling writing the essay that is due within 48 hours. She does an Internet search for her topic and finds a Website that has “examples” of essays on her topic for a fee. She purchases the essay and turns in her assignment the next day. How does the instructor ensure that the student submitted her own work?

Academic dishonesty is not new to education. Davis, Grover, Becker, and McGregor (1992) reported that 40% to 60% of the students in their study cheated on at least one examination. With the advances in technology and the geographical distance between student and instructor, there is a perceived increase in the prevalence of academic dishonesty (Kennedy, Nowak, Raghuraman, Thomas, & Davis, 2000). This perception of academic dishonesty is a serious threat to distance education.

The offenses of academic dishonesty for distance education include similar offenses for classroom instruction such as plagiarism, concealed notes for tests, buying essays, or exchanging work with other students. Technology and geographical distance has provided ways around the traditional offenses. Emails, rather than notes or erasers, are used to pass answers. Scanners, such as the C-Pen (www.cpen.com), can be used to scan documents that can be downloaded to a PC or PDA. Word processing has made it easier to cut and paste information from electronic media. Websites, such as “Term Paper Relief” (www.termpaperrelief.com) and “CheatHouse” (www.cheathouse.com), allow essays to be purchased or downloaded and also provide customized papers for a fee. Electronic discussion boards may provide assistance to students who in turn paste the answers into their own work without acknowledging the assistance.

Just as in a classroom setting, there are ways to prevent academic dishonesty in the online environment. Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, and Zvacek (2003) recommend focusing on strategies for preventing academic dishonesty and assisting students to resist the temptation. This can be accomplished by developing a clear policy on ethics for academic dishonesty. It is also important for faculty to clearly identify their ethical standards in the course syllabi before the class begins and follow through with punishment if academic dishonesty occurs. The current generation of students has been downloading music and games from the Internet without giving thought to copyright laws. They need to learn how to gather accurate information online and cite it accordingly. The instructor must practice good ethics as well with course materials and students’ work.

Sound instructional design will also assist in reducing academic dishonesty. The course should contain a variety of assessments along with opportunities to interact with the students. An electronic portfolio is one way to store a student’s work. Paper-and-pencil tests can be done electronically. To prevent academic dishonesty, the instructor can use a log-in system in which the username and password is sent to the student just prior to the test being made available. The username and password can be changed for each assessment by using Blackboard or WebCT to deter academic dishonesty. Dates and time limitations can also be set for tests, along with randomization of questions. Remember, resources are still available for the student when taking the test. Questions need to be written requiring the student to comprehend basic information. Incorporating short answer and essay questions gives the instructor the opportunity to compare the writing with other written assignments, such as threaded discussion and term papers.

Another strategy is to utilize interaction between students and the instructor. Utilizing group projects can help prevent academic dishonesty. It would be difficult for a student to find consistent help throughout complex projects that involves others over a period of time. Instructors can get to know their students by using frequent emails and chat sessions. These interactions will give the instructor a better feel of a student’s abilities. At different points in the semester, the instructor can place phone calls to discuss assignments that have been submitted by the student.

Written assignments can be effective assessments by requiring the students to relate the topic to their own personal or professional experiences. Another method is to have the students turn in drafts before the final submission. All drafts and final papers should be submitted electronically to keep a record of submissions. Email and drop-box features are common for submitting documents. Just as the Internet is assisting in plagiarism, it can help curb the issue. The instructor can use online bookstores and libraries to check references. Keyword searches can be done on the Internet through search engines such as Google (www.google.com). Essay Verification Engine (EVE2) (www.canexus.com/eve/index.shtml) or Plagiarism.org (www.plagiarism.org) are services available to submit papers for review of plagiarism.

Academic dishonesty has always been a concern for instructors and will continue to be a concern. Instructors need to be proactive and vigilant by considering alternative assessments and modifying course materials on a regular basis. Underwood and Szabo (2003) stated, “the range of dishonest practice is limited only by students’ abilities to use technology creatively” (p. 470).

Transactional distance is the perceived distance between the learner and teacher, which can affect the instruction and interaction between the learner and teacher. The interaction can be negatively affected by the perceived distance. This section of the article will describe several variables within the teacher-learner interaction, and will tie in learner autonomy to this learning theory (Wheeler, 2003).

Moore and Kearsley (2005) defined transactional distance as: “the gap of understanding and communication between the teachers and learners caused by geographic distance that must be bridged through distinctive procedures in instructional design and the facilitation of interaction” (p. 223). The transaction of instruction between learner and teacher then, can affect behaviors. These behaviors fall into two variables or categories: dialog and structure (Moore & Kearsley, 2005; Wheeler, 2003 ).

Dialog is the messaging and response between the learner and teacher. According to Moore and Kearsley (1996), “The extent and nature of this dialog is determined by the educational philosophy of the individual or group responsible for the design of the course, by the personalities of teacher and learner, by the subject matter of the course, and by environmental factors” (p. 201). Size of a learning group, language, and medium are three environmental factors to consider when designing instruction. How does the size of the learning group impact dialog? One-to-one dialog between learner and teacher is more probable than a group of learners to one single teacher.

Adding to this, Wheeler (2003) suggested that this could also mean learner-to-learner interaction or interaction between instructional materials and the learner. Wheeler also suggested that these environmental factors should also be considered during the design of face-to-face instruction. In terms of medium, the primary mode of dialog will most likely take place through the use of technology.

Wheeler (2003) indicates that “technology, if used effectively, can provide students with learning experiences that qualitatively correspond to those experienced in traditional modes of delivery” (p. 91). Media such as email, threaded discussions, and Web logs (“blogs”), can be used to build and share ideas, construct knowledge, and build upon social networks and mentoring communities.

Structure relates to the elements of the course, such as learning objectives, instructional strategies, assignments, assessment and evaluation, and schedule. An instructional designer may choose to organize a course structure with rigidity or flexibility. What is key to transactional distance theory, is the organization of course structure and the ability to meet learner needs (Moore & Keasley, 1996) without frustrating the learner or allowing the learner to flounder. This idea is tied directly to learner autonomy.

Both Wheeler (2003) and Moore and Keasley (1996) discussed the second dimension of transactional distance learning theory as learner autonomy, relating this dimension back to dialog and structure. Wheeler (2003) suggested that distance learners are autonomous to a great extent, in order to support and carry out their learning initiative. This is why an understanding of transactional distance theory can be used to diminish perceived distance and encourage positive dialog and sound instructional structure. While adult learners are autonomous and motivated to self-regulate their learning experience, instructional designers can benefit from drawing on methods to help motivate self-regulated learners. One method is the ARCS model of motivational design (Driscoll, 2000). The ARCS model uses the following strategies: gain and sustain Attention; enhance Relevance; build Confidence; generate Satisfaction. According to Driscoll (2000), instructional designers building the ARCS model into instruction “analyze the audience, define motivational objectives, design a motivational strategy, and try out and revise as necessary” (p. 301).

Finally, teachers and instructional designers ought not to rely too heavily on learner autonomy. It is important to understand the impact of transactional distance theory has on learner-teacher behaviors. Addressing dialog styles and strategies, and designing sound course structure will diminish learner floundering and increase rich dialog patterns, and behaviors. Rich behaviors are evident not just between learner and teacher, but also between learner-to-learner and learner and instructional materials.