Is there Anybody out there?: Teaching Assistants’ Experiences of Online Learning

Online distance education is a growing force in lifelong learning. Due to the rapid development of Web-based technologies, increasing bandwidth, decreasing costs and widening access, online versions of distance education programmes are becoming increasingly popular teaching strategies for universities to adopt. Any institution intending to develop online distance education programmes would be prudent to start by considering the key elements of the field. Distance education is characterised by a geographical and sometimes, temporal separation of student and tutor (Perraton, 1988). Distance education is also characterised by the devolving of control over the learning process towards the student and away from the tutor (Jonassen, 2000). Most commentators agree that communication between student and tutor is generally mediated by print or some other form of technology (Keegan, 1986; Garrison & Shale, 1987; Simonson, Smaldino, Albright & Zvacek, 2000). Technology mediated communication in distance education has various benefits and limitations, and these have been well documented in recent years (Katz, 2000; Wheeler, 2003). Whatever the reasons for the use of online distance education, course planners should strive to create equivalent learning experiences for remote students (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2000) and offer support equivalent to those enjoyed by classroom-based students (Wheeler, 2002).

In September 2002, a small group of teaching assistants (n = 13) at the University of Plymouth commenced a new pilot module, as part of their Foundation Degree training. Teaching assistants are generally employed in UK schools to support children’s learning and work alongside qualified teachers. The module entitled “Study Skills: is delivered exclusively in online format and has been designed to promote and develop students’ thinking and learning skills at a level appropriate for those students undertaking a course of study in higher education. The pilot study will inform future delivery of the module to an estimated 800 distance learners over the next two years.

This investigation is charged primarily with an examination and evaluation of the key areas that are thought to determine the nature of students’ experiences when using Web-based technologies within distance education. The following core strands have been identified as being the central areas from which this study will base its research data collection and subsequent analysis:

• Identifying and evaluating the factors determining the framework and content necessary for a successful delivery of a course using the Internet;

• Observing how the course objectives and anticipated learning outcomes were met exclusively using Web-based resources;

• Monitoring and evaluating the quality of online teaching and learning;

• Identifying the extent to which good ICT skills enhanced the students’ levels of performance during study;

• Examining the extent to which Internet access was a key factor for students in their course evaluation;

• Recording the impact undertaking the course had on developing students’ own learning skills;

The Foundation Degree in Education (Teaching Assistants) was introduced to gradually replace the existing Certificate and Diploma in Higher Education (HE) courses. The course is presented in modular format, with content prescribed to meet the range of needs of teaching assistants in schools. Currently, some 900 students study on a part-time basis at centres across the South West of England. The course content is modular, covering areas such as Inclusive Education, Supporting Children with Complex and Special Educational Needs, and Information & Communication Technologies (ICT). Students study at two levels, HE 4 and 5, in order to obtain their appropriate qualifications.

During the period of this study, the UK government brought to the forefront the debate on the developing roles of schools support staff (DfES, October, 2002), which further raised the profile of teaching assistant training, initiated by the setting up of a framework of Nationally Recognised Qualifications for Teaching Assistants in the previous year (Employers Organisation, 2001).

When considering the content for any foundation degree course, the requirements of the Quality Assessment Agency (QAA) must be adhered to, ensuring that academic knowledge and understanding are brought to bear to reinforce and support vocational skills development with appropriate academic rigour. This should be achieved by combining work-based skills and academic learning (Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education, 2002).

The guidelines also state that students should be able to effectively communicate information, arguments, and analysis in a variety of forms to various audiences. Students should also be able to attain new competencies that will enable them to assume responsibilities in organisations, as well as acquire other, transferable, skills necessary for employment and progression to other qualifications (QAA, 2002).

However, whilst many of these skills would be integral to the learning objectives and outcomes of the taught modules, it was decided to establish a programme of study as a separate module. This was designed to facilitate the development of specific key transferable academic skills, facilitating students in their learner and classroom educator roles; all the students on the foundation degree course are also working as teaching assistants within schools. No formal qualifications are currently required to join the foundation degree course, and a high proportion of students have little or no recent experience of studying at this academic level. Consequently, a module that facilitated the development of parallel learning skills was seen as the means through which students could engage in their studies at University level.

The establishment of the study skills module, however, presented the university with certain logistical problems: the student population is potentially large, with a potential 900 part-time students. These are dispersed geographically across the South West of England, so conventional educational resources would be unavailable. Additionally, the course had to be of equivalent content and academic level, and was validated for the same credit rating as face-to-face modules. After considerable discussion, it was proposed that the entire module be delivered in a Web-based distance-learning format.

During the summer of 2002, the content of a variety of online distance learning frameworks offered by other predominantly North American Universities was investigated and evaluated, based on the criteria:

• ease of accessibility, including navigation and signposting of the online resources, the level of supporting information offered, and issues around presentation of learning resources within the context of the any disabilities that students may have (Special Educational Needs and Disability Act, 2001);

• the clear identification of course objectives and anticipated learning outcomes;

• ease and means of access to tutors by students (and vice versa)—was there evidence that systems had been evolved for enabling students to contact tutors, tutors contacting students either individually, or as groups;

• how they were able to meet the objectives that the University of Plymouth course sought to deliver;

• how the courses were “physically” structured in terms of providing a framework for content (for example, was the course offered in modular sections?).

As a result of this investigation, criteria for the Study Skills Web-based resource were established as follows:

• a dedicated study skills Website was constructed, designed to support a format that was easy to access and navigate, containing all course information, including rationale, theoretical background, learning objectives and outcomes, as well as the actual content itself (Wheeler & Townsend, 2003);

• a simplified system was established to transmit submissions and course information between students and tutors, using basic e-mail attachment protocols;

• learning objectives were carefully matched to anticipated outcomes by determining a set of individual “standalone” units within the module itself;

• students were given the opportunity to participate in technologies that would enable them to “virtually” cross the geographical divide between them. This was achieved by making videoconferencing available for all students

The discussion of module content centred upon two themes: that such a course be used to promote and develop key thinking skills as well as key study skills in participating students. The core elements intended to develop students’ thinking skills were drawn from a variety of theoretical sources, but especially from David Jonassen’s integrated model (Jonassen, 1997). In this model, Jonassen seeks to identify essential thinking skills within three core strands: basic (skills, attitudes and dispositions required to learn essential information), critical (the dynamic re-organisation of knowledge to generate new knowledge), and creative (the requirement to go beyond accepted knowledge to generate new knowledge) skills. From the further breakdown of each strand into itemised skills descriptors, the translation of thinking skills into study skills was then possible. For example, “synthesising” thought processes were broken down by Jonassen into specific areas such as action-planning, which clearly could form the basis of a specific element of study skills. By designing a course that was able to cross-reference its content to all these specified areas, it was anticipated that students would benefit from a “holistic” approach to the development of their overall ability to learn.

Overall, nine areas of study/learning skills were identified from the integrated thinking model for inclusion within the module: analysis, evaluating, connecting, problem solving, designing (solutions), decision-making, synthesising, elaborating, and imagining. Within this framework, a series of nine stand-alone units were created which included: activities for students to investigate and evaluate Web-based resources; a scenario for giving a presentation to a remote group via a live video link; and identifying research questions and ethical issues when undertaking an assignment. All units were based on similar, tabular, format, enabling students to answer questions related to the activity in boxes. Each unit was supported by an online lecture that contained information on how to carry out the related tasks, as well as discussion on the themes that were fundamentally being explored.

These objectives, outcomes, and processes should not be seen as existing just within their own categories. Rather, they exist as mutually inclusive entities within the context of this particular module; for example, the distance learning objective of fostering cooperation, even with great physical distances between participants, is embraced within the study skills aim of developing effective interpersonal skills.

The students were located throughout the South West of England and selected from a list of volunteers. The scattered geographical nature of the student population itself added depth to the study; the central ethos of distance learning is based on students being reached wherever they are located.

The module itself was constructed on a dedicated Website, built by two members of University of Plymouth academic staff, and contained all the information required to complete the course, including listing syllabus content, identifying underpinning theory, detailing learning outcomes, and itemising assessed skills criteria. Specific activities for the students were also listed, along with detailed instructions on how to carry these out, presented in the form of a series of accompanying “online lectures.” The focus of the module was aimed at developing students’ own abilities for studying at higher education levels.

It is envisaged that the module would be delivered in the future to around 700 students. Therefore, as the entire concept of the module was new to both educators and students, methods were designed for monitoring and evaluating the students’ experiences, both academic and emotional, as a result of studying in such a manner.

For the purposes of this study, the 13 students were divided into two groups, each with their own specific research criteria in order that evaluation of the course could focus on how experiences varied according to levels of face-to-face support from university tutors. All students were volunteers, randomly sorted into two groups, and all agreed to their designated grouping arrangements.

Group A received no face-to-face support with tutors, except when being assisted during videoconferencing sessions. They relied solely on information provided on the dedicated Website along with email support from staff.

Group B received face-to-face support with tutors before, during, and at the end of the course, along with the information offered to those in the former group.

The reasons for this differentiation were various. Comparative data across pre-identified fields of investigation for analysis could be gathered, ongoing evaluation from both groups would quickly identify any technical problems encountered with the online format, which could then be quickly resolved, and the experiences of each group also could be transmitted to the other. Data for evaluating each group’s experiences of the course were collected using three main methods: interviews with individuals and groups; e-mail responses from students; and a questionnaire designed to examine and quantify the range of responses from students. The results from the questionnaire are not included in this particular study, as initial research has been based on qualitative evaluation only.

All students who participated in interviews, or gave information in text-based format, were agreeable to the inclusion of their comments for the purposes of this research project. No student has been identified by name.

The students undertaking the pilot course were originally selected on a voluntary basis during a presentation at the University of Plymouth’s first conference for teaching assistants in June 2002, when the delegates were informed about the proposed online study skills module. Thirteen students were accepted, based only on the criteria that they were enrolled as Cert HE, Dip HE, or Foundation Degree students, and that the pilot group had to be of a manageable number in order that tutors could engage fully, and responsively, in the evaluative process. All students were female with their own school-aged children, and worked either fullor part-time in schools (primary and secondary). Of the 13 students, one had advanced ICT skills and had knowledge of how to construct a Website. Two had intermediate skill levels and were proficient at using word-processing and other software. Of the remaining 10, most reported having a basic level of skills, such as how to use a mouse and keyboard. The latter group also admitted to a “fear” of using computers, but recognised the necessity to develop their ICT skills, and this was cited as a key reason for their enthusiasm to embark on the course.

Technology has been conceptualised by some commentators as simply a vehicle that conveys information, and cannot in itself influence learning (Clarke, 1994), since it is the manner in which teachers use the technology that makes the difference. Delacôte (1996) cites a Californian study which showed that many schools linked up to internal and external networks, but merely used these facilities to perform traditional teaching functions, with no opportunity given to students to explore new approaches to learning (Acacia Initiative, 2003). Ostensibly, merely introducing technology into the classroom will not bring about improvement or change in the teaching process, unless it is used in an innovative manner (Wheeler, 2001).

There is certainly nothing new about students studying for modules using online distance education. However, the pilot group of students undertaking online distance learning as part of their training to develop their roles as educators saw it as innovative, particularly because it gave the group the opportunity to manage their own learning. Most had not previously experienced learning of such an autonomous nature. As the pilot module progressed, other innovative elements that such a course could offer became manifest:

• the online nature of the module encouraged collaborative learning between students, many of whom were new to ICT, establishing systems for communicating electronically, including using an online discussion group;

• open access to tutors at all times by e-mail, whether for raising queries, sending submissions, or engaging in an asynchronous email tutorial encouraged students to use this facility in an increasingly collaborative fashion. It can be argued that these scenarios replicate the kind of collaborative learning that pupils themselves engage in when using ICT for their own use (for example, using chat rooms to discuss how they can raise their levels of performance when playing particular computer games;

• the use of videoconferencing technologies to deliver lectures, seminars, and students’ own presentations;

The findings of this study are based on face-to-face formal interviews with Group B students, and email responses from groups A and B. In this particular study, the quality of the learning experience is the paramount issue for examination, especially if this delivery style is to be broadened to encompass in the near future to such relatively large numbers of students. It is essential to establish that students are learning at a rate that is at least equivalent to that when taught face-to-face, and that the other key features that make traditional courses successful for students are present. These include opportunities to question and discuss with tutors, opportunities to discuss with other students, and a sense of being supported rather than isolated.

The quality of learning has in part been assured by establishing objectives and outcomes that relate to the university’s own statement of skills to be attained at this level. Learning outcomes were examined closely within the context of the module objectives, and it was anticipated that the design of the course framework and content had been tailored to meet these formal requirements exactly.

Students’ responses at the end of the course were set in the context of the learning aims of the module. All students reported both positive and negative aspects to their experience, but the nature of these comments differed. For example, those students who participated in a technically problematic videoconference between two sites were more likely to cite videoconferencing as being a less successful medium than those who took part in such links that were technically unflawed. Even within the group who experienced the difficulties, the range of comments was diverse, clearly making evaluation of experiences difficult. Yet, when the situation was turned into a learning experience in which students volunteered their own “codes of practice” for ensuring that any future links would at least have a good chance of running without difficulties, the students realised that not all learning occurs in a planned, formalised manner.

All students had engaged with technology at a higher level by the end of the course than they had prior to undertaking the module. Whilst the ICT skills required for accessing the online resources were designed to basic in terms of software operation, the most marked change was the students’ depth of engagement with the subject matter. This was partially due to better understanding of the requirements to complete tasks successfully but also, more significantly, was the result of acquiring those thinking and studying skills that had been learned online. For example, students in one task were asked to comparatively evaluate the content of two similarly themed Websites. Submissions of related assignments suggested that students were indeed using a higher level of analytical, evaluative, and connecting skills (Jonassen, 2000) than at the beginning of the course. A teaching assistant working in Dorset commented at the beginning of the course that she “hoped to gain skills in reflective thinking, and be able to consider in depth the content of my assignments,” aspirations that the online course had been exactly designed to meet.

Moore and Kearsley (1996) identified three key areas of interaction in distance learning. Learner-content interaction relates to the student’s use of learning resources, and generally occupies much of independent learning time. Learner-instructor interaction occurs when students require direct support from their tutors, for academic, practical, or social reasons (Carnwell, 2000). Finally, learner-learner interaction occurs when students are provided with the option to mutually support each other, participate in discussion, or collaborate together through technology-mediated communication.

Interactivity can thus be described as having several levels, ranging from students giving evaluative feedback at the end of an experience, at its most sophisticated, through to students taking full control over their own learning in every aspect of their experience. The control factor that students were offered by the design of this module, however, cut a path somewhere between the two extremes. Students were able to manage their own learning schedules, but the overall content of the online teaching was more “prescriptive” than “open,” using the criteria described by Rogers (1983).

The ICT component of this course was integral to the levels of interaction. As Mason (1994) reflected, technologies used in open and distance learning have, until recent years, been rated by the extent to which they can reproduce the classroom scenario, concluding that they will not achieve success until the particular technology is exploited for its unique facilities. The uniqueness that this online course offered was primarily threefold; firstly, it was based on an asynchronous delivery framework. The success of this format can be underscored by one student’s comments:

All students reported positive feelings about being able to access units, lectures, resources and lectures 24 hours a day. They also acknowledged the sense of responsibility that this passes on to the learner. One student noted:

Secondly, the element of user-control enabled students to manage their own learning to their own advantage; for example, a student reported that she was able to optimise her learning through:

Thirdly, Mason (1994) points out how interactivity changes the teaching and learning relationship between student and teacher. In traditional scenarios, the ratio of teacher to student dialogue may be as high as 4:1, whilst in distance education, the ratio may be more student-favoured. From the experience of this course, it is clear that students are inputting at least as much dialogue as the teachers, whether it is in the form of e-mailing, using discussion groups, or in the nature of their assignments and evaluative comments. However, Lewis and Vizcaro (1999) maintained that the structure of a distance-education course should make the role of tutor “clear and distinct” if he or she is to remain an effective teacher. Nevertheless, the dialogue balance does give the student a feeling of control, which, according to Coomey and Stephenson (2001), is one of four key areas to be addressed if successful online learning is to be delivered. They proposed that perceptions of levels of control are determined by the extent to which learners have control of key learning activities, and the extent to which the learner is encouraged to exercise that control.

The study skills course aimed to facilitate and encourage learner control as far as possible. The format enabled students to: determine their own pace, timing, and order of learning; choose to some extent the content of their studies; manage their own personal learning goals and outcomes; determine the direction and focus of their learning; assess, evaluate, and reflect on their own learning. Whilst some of these components of delivery could have been facilitated within traditional educational settings, to replicate all in such environments would surely pose logistical and management difficulties for students and educators alike.

Students’ expectations of the course prior to commencing study were, as anticipated, quite different from their evaluative comments upon completion. This group of students were all (with the exception of one who had previously studied with the Open University) initially unfamiliar with the concept of online learning. Expectations focused in equal measure around fears and enthusiasm. There was fear of being inadequately skilled to successfully complete the course and fear of studying in isolation. There was the fear of not knowing what the tutors expected from them. Countering this, there was enthusiasm to participate in a new way of learning, and enthusiasm for undertaking a course that had the prime aim of extending their own thinking and learning skills.

Throughout the ongoing evaluation of the pilot module, interval testing of students’ feelings about the course helped tutors to refine aspects of delivery, especially those that raised issues of concern amongst the students. Students were generally surprised at how few ICT skills were required to successfully complete the course, and skills that were lacking were acquired relatively quickly.

All students reported that the greatest benefit of online learning was the flexibility to choose when, where, and how they studied. Most students shared similar domestic backgrounds, having families and being in full-time employment in schools. For most, therefore, attending traditional teaching sessions was problematic. Using the online resources enabled them to choose times of the week that best suited their own learning, studying late at night when their children were asleep, or working on weekends when family commitments were less demanding.

Students also reported that timely e-mail tutor response was a key factor in determining the degree of social isolation experienced, an element that can be intrinsic to the nature and indeed success or failure of distance education delivery. The immediacy of response served to lessen feelings of such isolation, which students reported to be less than anticipated. The solitary nature of distance learning was further ameliorated by the arrival of frequent and regular personalised communication by email. One student commented:

Similarly, the weekly online lectures were presented in an informal tone; initial comments from all students to the lectures were positive. They eagerly awaited publication of each Monday’s lecture, and frequently fed back comments to the tutors. One student wrote:

Most of the students reported that they preferred to print the online lectures so that they could make notes in the margins, highlight, and file for instant access.

Collaborative learning scenarios developed naturally between the students, with individuals learning to exploit the asynchronous format either by using the University’s online “discussion group,” or by establishing their own virtual community of practice. One student reported:

This feeling was backed up by a Teaching Assistant working in East Devon, who commented,

Another had found her own way of obtaining peer support:

Notwithstanding, some did express feelings of isolation, although these were not considered by individuals to be detrimental to their overall learning experience.

All students reported that the format of the stand-alone units support was easy to use and understand, although those who had a face-to-face introduction to the module became confident users of the system sooner than if they had been working exclusively with “virtual contact.”

The prime concerns reported during the course by students were focused around their own access to the Web-based learning resources. Issues of “digital divide” surfaced in the nature of these difficulties. Several students had to wait for their children to finish using the family PC for their homework, which meant that they were often working late at night (but not necessarily any less effectively), as proven by the times that submissions were sent by email to tutors. Those who used their own school’s computers for study were at times hindered by ISP filtering systems denying them access to such sites as the University’s online library catalogue, LIBERTAS. Several reported incidences of networking problems in school rendering entire systems inoperable for periods of time. An additional problem was actually gaining the opportunity to use schools’ equipment, such was the pressure of usage by both staff and pupils.

Nonetheless, the expected difficulties when using new ICT-based equipment were reported at a surprisingly low level of frequency. To some extent, these had been pre-empted by posting solutions to the most commonly encountered problems on the Website. The online lectures also contained information and guidance about using the Web-based resources that were integral to the programme of study. Instructions on how to use software such as Microsoft PowerPoint, which several students wanted to employ for supporting their video-linked presentations, were also added to the Website. However, it does seem that a central ethos of the course, aimed at developing the higher-order thinking and learning skills of problem-solving encouraged students to explore solutions themselves more readily than if they were experiencing regular face-to-face teaching.

One videoconference was marred by technical difficulties, and all five students involved in this session cited it as the least successful element of the course. However, together with the tutors involved, they learned some important lessons from this, and were not dismissive about this distance communication tool, objectively acknowledging the potential of videoconferencing in their own schools.

There are clear implications for online learning. Since commencing the course, students have reported upon the benefits that they have received from studying online. They have all made some degree of progression in their own ICT skills and feel more confident when using Web-based resources. They have responded positively to the opportunity to manage their own learning, and they have acknowledged the development of their own study skills, such as in presenting, analysing and reflecting and, indeed, self-evaluation. Two students were delighted to report that they had gained promotion as a direct result of undertaking the study skills course.

It is perhaps the content of the course itself that has been most significant in developing these skills, rather than the method of its delivery, confirming that ICT is merely the tool, albeit a highly effective one, for effectively delivering and developing learning. Coomey and Stephenson (2001) identified four key elements that must be considered if online learning is to be successfully delivered: dialogue, involvement, support, and control. Tutors delivering the course endeavoured to address these elements from the outset, both in the design and content of the “physical” framework, and in the ongoing delivery of the course throughout the study. It is doubtful that the quality of the course would have differed greatly if it had instead been offered in traditional format. In fact, two of the online lectures were delivered face-to-face to students in focus group B, with responses from them not dissimilar to those when students had to refer to the online versions.

The quality and quantity of responses from students did not vary between the two groups. Those with no face-to-face contact had developed extensive use of the e-mail system, to the point where their questions and comments were equally as sophisticated as those who received regular face-to-face input. The one area of clear difference, however, was the time taken to adapt to the new learning methods, their use, and the understanding of exactly what the tutors required in terms of outcomes. Group B was considerably advantaged in this, adapting more quickly and with fewer interval questions about operational procedures.

The success of online distance education would partly seem to be founded on the adoption of open-learning scenarios, as identified by Rogers (1983), that are inherent in its delivery processes. Describing the concept of open learning, Rogers cited learning success being achieved when the promotion of self evaluation, the use of “real” problems for investigation, collaborative peer teaching, and the provision of a responsive environment that facilitates investigation and questioning, are deeply embedded within the ethos of education. Horowitz (1978) showed in his research that this level of success can be quantified. Seventy-eight percent of the students he questioned found open learning methods “better” than traditional methods in terms of developing independence skills, and 36% found such methods better for developing creative skills.

Many of the students might concur with Sewart’s view that distance learning liberates students, enabling them to learn where and when they want and at a pace that suits them. Sewart considered that this freedom proffers a more individualised system than conventional teaching, at least from the perspective of the student (Sewart, 1998).

The results gathered from examining evaluative comments from students, and indeed, the tutors’ own experiences of running such a course have provided sufficient information to make adjustments to the pilot programme that should enable it to be delivered to all students undertaking the module in the future. Adjustments included: re-organising the Website layout, reducing the number of videoconferences, and changing content of some of the teaching units. Currently, a second pilot module is being undertaken by a group of 70 students located throughout Cornwall. The results of this study will be published in due course.