Bob Cram
Director, Extension Credit Studies, Campus Manitoba
University of Saskatchewan

Kathleen Matheos
Brandon University

Introduction

It has been observed that the world of distance learning, especially online learning, is being influenced by two contradictory influences: collaboration and competition (Bates, 2000; Rowley, Lujan and Dolence, 1998). This is driven in part by globalization and the emerging competition from the private sector world of corporate, virtual universities. What should guide the responses of traditional providers of distance learning? Do we just as a means of beating the competition, or are we equally concerned about serving public societal goals of accessibility for all learners? Is there a way that universities can better meet the needs of learners and compete in a new environment?

During the past year, the emerging CampusWest consortium has struggled with these issues. Very early on in the process, it was suggested by one of the university representatives that we should use an action research model to study the process of collaboration itself. Action research is by definition collaborative (Kemmis and McTaggart, 1988), and the work of the consortium has also been collaborative. Its goals, principles, and Implementation Plan have emerged from a group of effort of discussion, critical reflection, and consensus-building. Although the process of forming the consortium is still ongoing, this paper is an attempt to critically reflect upon the process of collaboration in distance education while working through the process itself.

What is CampusWest?

The CampusWest Consortium began its work in 1998 at the request of the Deans of Continuing Education at western Canadian universities. They expressed concerns about the increasingly competitive environment of distance education, ways in which we could pool course offerings, and the need for some sort of centralized listing of courses and transfer credit information and processes so that students could meet their learning needs more easily.

In November 1998 individuals from about a dozen universities met in Calgary to discuss the possible options and make recommendations to the Deans of Continuing Education. It soon emerged that there was a strong desire in principle to work together. The representatives were from very different types of universities--small and large, teaching and research, single and dual mode--but there was a common desire to share courses, development plans and good practices. The inclusion of easy-to-use information on transfer credit became a central goal for the consortium, because it would make the information more than just another list of courses on the World Wide Web and would contribute substantially to making it easier for students to complete degrees at a distance.

The result of these and other discussions led to the development of an implementation plan for the project. Within this plan several guiding principles evolved.

• To provide a user-friendly accessible and maintainable web-based site for students and advisors to access information about distance education courses, including course description, mode of delivery, technical requirements, regional availability, cost, transfer credit, registration information, and appropriate contacts at the offering institution.

• To identify on the Web Site resources available from the partner universities to support students within their learning

• To provide a forum for institutions to share development plans, encourage collaboration and rationalization of programs, share best practices, technological knowledge, research and evaluation on a protected web-site

• Through a wide-spread shared marketing of the web-site, to raise the profile of the many, high quality distance learning opportunities within Western Canadian universities

• To provide a catalyst for research in virtual learning and consortia management

• To facilitate access for learners to participation in distance learning courses

Having agreed upon an implementation plan in October 1999, twelve universities agreed to be part of the initiative. A Steering Committee with representatives from each university was set up, and a meeting held in November of 1999. At this time it was determined that Athabasca University would develop the database. The transfer credit issue was still central and a process by which each institution would submit its distance education offerings for review by other institutions was decided upon. The transfer credit issue was anticipated to be difficult, but for certain institutions it has become a mammoth task. However, it was recognised as a major goal of the consortium and to develop a course list without this field would not serve student needs.

Our presentation will report on these developments in more detail, but certain lessons from this experience are apparent. Many of these lessons tend to be supported by the literature on collaboration (Gray, 1991; Wong; 1992; Wong, 1994).

• The goals to be achieved by a consortium are often regarded differently by administrators at various levels within individual institutions, and processes need to be put in place to ensure good communications and agreement on goals within institutions.

• In its formative stages, a consortium should have principles that allow possible participating members to enter and leave the consortium easily, without any sense of rancour or betrayal of trust. This lowers the risk for participants, allows committed partners to move ahead, and permits a "return to the fold" at a later date.

• The organizational cultures of the various members of a consortium affect the ease with which they can work together (e.g. more traditional, research-based vs. open learning, single mode).

• A consortium should emphasize a few very focused, clearly articulated goals, since it is easy for individual institutions to focus too heavily on their likes or dislikes concerning secondary goals.

• The collaborative process is very different from traditional negotiating process. Participants must have a real, internalized commitment to be open to differing perceptions and to share information freely.

• Collaboration in distance education is time-consuming, and the process itself is critical to the success of the initiative. It takes time to build consensus.

• It is tempting to think that all is well once an agreement is constructed, but you should expect problems during the implementation phase and approach those with the same openness and information sharing as in the formative phase.

 

References

Bates, A.W. (2000). Managing Technological Change: Strategies for College and University Leaders. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Gray, B. (1991). Collaborating: Finding Common Ground for Multiparty Problems. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Kemmis, S. and McTaggart, R. (1988, 3^rd ed.). Introduction: The Nature of Action Research. In S. Kemmis and R. McTaggart (Eds.) The Action Research Planner, 5-28.

Rowley, D.J., Lujan, H.D. and Dolence, M.G. Strategic Choices for the Academy: How Demand for Lifelong Learning Will Re-Create Higher Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1998.

Wong, A. (1994). Institutional Collaboration: Thinking Globally, Acting Locally. In M. Brooke and M. Waldron (Eds.), University Continuing Education in Canada: Current Challenges and Future Opportunities. Toronto: Thompson Educational Publishing Inc., 188-196

Retour à la rubrique Actes du Congrès / Back to the Proceedings Page