‘Some see things that are, and ask why.
I dream of things that never were and ask why not”
—Robert F. Kennedy
Distance education, in its various forms, has evolved to a point where it is technologically feasible, socially acceptable, and financially justified. With concerns over its effectiveness and practicality largely resolved, distance education potentially offers two distinct advantages over traditional face-to-face instruction: first, the ability to deliver instruction anytime and anyplace, thus increasing access for learners who otherwise could not be served and, second, the capacity for creating environments that allow for instructional models that are impractical or inefficient in a traditional classroom. The first advantage, of expanding access, offers a solution to a real problem and is a noble endeavor worth pursuing for its own sake; however, this issue of QRDE focuses on the latter advantage. Certainly, distance education could replicate classroom learning to some extent. But why should it, when many consider classroom instruction far from an ideal learning environment? For distance education to reach its potential of providing instruction and prompting learning beyond what is feasible in the classroom, existing pedagogy and the accompanying instructional strategies must be expanded to exploit the capabilities presented by technology.
Unfortunately, that does not seem to be what actually is happening in the everyday world of distance education. It appears that distance education is following the same path as many other technological advances in education; that is, technology is being infused into the learning process as if it were a magic pill able to cure whatever ails the educational process. Distance education, and especially its most prominent variant, Web-based education, is the latest buzzword sprinkled throughout the education universe. Overnight, it looks as if everyone is rushing to promote this idea. With so many institutions and corporations moving to assimilate technology for teaching at a distance, it makes me wonder if in their haste, the agenda has less to do with improving the educational experience and outcomes and more to do with a superficial logic, the answer being best left to the reader’s imagination. My concern is not only fueled by a historical precedent, in which distance education will end up on the closet floor with all the other technologies that were praised and soon forgotten, but also that we are missing an opportunity to expand our repertoire of learning-enhancing approaches.
The good news is that the solution is clear. As researchers, professors, designers, developers, and providers of distance education, we need to encourage a dialogue regarding distance education—a dialogue that looks beyond the empirical studies and theoretical models, but also at the ideas. Maybe we need to ask those questions, discuss the ideas, and argue the unspoken that can lead us to understand the ways in which distance education can make lasting improvements to the educational environment.
This issue of QRDE is a step in that direction. We are fortunate to have contributions from some of the leaders and great thinkers of our field such as David Jonassen, Roger Schank, Rob Foshay, James Levin, and Brent Wilson. Balancing out these well-known experts are several relative newcomers who are destined to make a major impact in our field including Rose Marra, David Wiley, and Douglas Harvey.
I am grateful to Mike Simonson and Charlie Schlosser for allowing this journal to help explore the unknown. This issue contains the works of authors who graciously agreed to explain their vision of what distance education could be. They were asked not to be bound by the status quo or the conventional, but rather, to challenge the readers with ideas, to take us out of our comfort zone, and to spark discussions. I believe they have succeeded.
