Lawrence C. Ragan, Ph.D.
Director of Instructional Design and development
Penn State’s World Campus

Introduction

To read the popular press, educators are just now discovering "new methods" for delivering course instruction to learners at a distance. Additionally, it is claimed, it is today’s electronic communications technology that makes this all possible. Institutions as well as corporate entities are scrambling to claim a stake-hold in this new domain. To those institutions who have long-standing histories involved in distance education around the world, these "new methods" have been the basis of providing decades of students with the opportunity to learn anytime and any place. Technology is regarded as an enabling and supporting element, not the panacea of all distance learning problems. With the advent of new communications technologies and an emerging marketplace, many institutions with traditional distance education programs are forced to reconsider the role of their delivery model and accommodate to a new playing field.

The foundation question to institutions addressing the need to transform traditional print-based or single-delivery models of distance education is not "do we embrace the new capabilities provided by the technologies?," rather "how do we maintain service and opportunity to the traditional learner as well as address the demands of the new distance learner?" The issue of speed of transformation is critical. Too much too fast and those without access to technology will be underserved. Too slow or too long of a transformation runs the risk of losing potential enrollments to more aggressive institutions. Finding the balance is crucial to steering the program through ever increasing but unchartered waters.

Penn State’s history with distance education traces back to the first correspondence offering via the home study program in 1892. Since those humble beginnings, Penn State’s Distance Education program has grown to serve over 20,000 students annually, enrolling students in over 200 courses. Independent Learning, a primarily print-based method of course delivery, has served as the foundation for providing individuals who cannot attend a Penn State campus the opportunity to participate in credit and non-credit collegiate study. In 1998, Penn State offered it’s first technology-based distance education course in Turf Grass Management via the World Campus, launching its version of the virtual university. With a firm commitment to serving the traditional while leading the new, the Independent Learning program and the World Campus started on a path to convergence. The path, however, is more complicated than first blush, and requires careful navigation through this dynamic process.

Something Old Something New

Before closer examination of the transformation process between the Independent Learning and World Campus programs can begin, a brief description of the similarities and differences is in order. Highlighting these differences is vital to understanding the complexities of the transformation process.

Penn State’s Independent Learning program consists of 200 courses spanning a variety of disciplines and academic program offerings. The majority of these courses are undergraduate-level credit courses delivered via print-based correspondence study. As the name implies, students enter and exit the course at their own pace with no interaction or collaboration with other students. Interaction between the learner and instructor, for the most case, is restricted to lesson and assignment grading. E-mail lesson submission and interaction with the instructor is preferred, however, many students rely on surface mail to submit or communicate on course issues. Independent Learning offers 17 different programs of study, most being associate degrees and certificates of completion. To date, one baccalaureate degree in Liberal Arts is under development.

Penn State’s World Campus was designed to address the needs of the working professional with credit and non-credit course offerings. The majority of these programs are targeted toward the advancement needs of individuals in fields such as engineering, education, geographic information systems, and xxxxx. To date, the World Campus consists of 16 programs being delivered or under development. Unlike the Independent Learning student, individuals participating in World Campus courses must have immediate and ready access to electronic communications technology. Completion of course assignments and evaluation methods are submitted via e-mail directly to the course instructor. Communications systems support dialog and collaboration with other students and instructor. The majority of courses offered via the World Campus are delivered to cohort or groups of students with set-start and set-end course timeframes.

Penn State’s World Campus was created using the core capabilities and services of the Independent Learning program. Several components of these services were expanded or enhanced to accommodate for the increased workload brought on by more demanding and developmentally complex programs. Services provided in Instructional Design and Development, for example, were expanded to include software programming and graphic art. Expanded staffing was required in Learner Support/Student Services to provide wider hours of phone service for inquiries and advising. The role of marketing communications was increased to promote the cohort-based World Campus courses in order to ensure critical enrollments for course offerings. Since the first course offering in 1998, the question arose of convergence of the Independent Learning and World Campus programs. What needed to be addressed were the real and perceived challenges of merging and growing these programs into one coherent system of distance delivery for Penn State.

One Model of Transformation

Perhaps the best method of exploring the issues surrounding the transformation process is to categorize the various components of Penn State’s distance education system. There are three main units created to serve the distance education needs of the University are Academic Programs, Instructional Design and Delivery, and Student Services/Learner Support. Additional services are provided by marketing communications, client development, and market research.

Academic Programs

Primarily designed to facilitate the acquisition of new academic programs for delivery via distance education, a new set of dynamics arose that required the care of specialized staff. Initially, increased staffing was required to address the negotiations between the World Campus and the academic unit. Although the academic unit always had control and ownership of the courses for Independent Learning, the compilation of these courses into programs that needed continual care and management once delivery and marketing began. The position of Program Manager was created to serve as the project lead through this process. Several critical issues needed to be addressed between the academic unit and the World Campus delivery system.

Departmental ownership and responsibility for portfolio management

Faculty assignment for course authoring and instruction

Faculty and departmental compensation/revenue arrangements

The portfolio management of individual courses within an academic unit and the long-term maintenance of a series of courses comprising a certificate or degree program delivered on a set time table creates the need to redefine the relationship between the principle players. Program managers serve the role of addressing those needs and bringing clarity to the issues of ownership and responsibilities.

Instructional Design and Development

Fundamental to the distinctions drawn between the traditional print-based Independent Learning program and the World Campus program is the instructional design of the course experience. Cohort-based, technology supported World Campus courses require a larger and more complex design and development team. Technology integration is at the basis of the desire to create and maintain learning communities at a distance. Also of vital importance is analyzing and understanding the audience differences between these programs. The traditional Independent Learning program at Penn State served a home-bound student unable to participate in a resident experience and without the resources to afford a high-tech approach. The World Campus learner, on the other hand, is typically a working professional interested in advancing their career by completing a certificate or degree of study in their field. Confusing the issue is the tremendous growth of home computing with access to the Internet. Providing opportunity for engagement in on-line learning communities for the independent learner while not inhibiting the access because of a high technology requirement continues to challenge designers. Conversely, proving maximum flexibility for the adult learner within defined start and end times for the cohort learner requires deft and creativity.

Additionally, instructional design and development staff must address issues including a new relationship with the course author and instructor.

Integration of optional versus required technology access

Changing roles and responsibilities of instructional design and development staff and faculty

Overdesign and complication of the instructional design model beyond what is required to accomplish the defined learning objectives

Role of the media in designing courses that can serve in both independent and cohort-delivery models

On-going faculty responsibilities to course instruction requiring increased amounts of resources for course delivery and management

Faculty development responsibilities

Instructional design and development remains at the core of the transformation process. It is complicated, however, by issues of faculty commitment and participation in an increasingly interactive and dynamic teaching and learning model. Some faculty and have made it clear that they want to innovate and progress toward new methods of serving their distance learners. Others are more content to remain serving learners at the same level as the traditional model. Convergence of these two models may require everyone involved to reconsider their commitment and interest in participating in distance delivery of educational programs.

Student Services/Learner Support

For the unit serving as the direct interface between the academy and the distance learner, the issues of convergence of programs challenge every aspect of support services. Originally designed to serve students participating in independent learning courses, the Student Services/Learner Support unit must now accommodate to serving students preparing to enter a cohort, technology-supported learning environment. Course materials distribution, registration systems, on-line payment, lesson tracking and advising have placed increased demands on the existing system and a re-engineering of staff activity. Several key issues related to serving the support needs of independent learning and cohort programs include

Communication of information for staff interacting with potential or existing learners

Integration of registration and administrative accounting systems

Lesson tracking and student progress monitoring

Expanded learner support requirements

24x7 technical support services

Increased student advising

Instructor compensation

One of the key features of a successful distance learning program is the depth and breadth of the student support services. Quality service is no longer an option, but a demand from an increasingly selective student population. Lack of service or support can bring an academically sound and technologically innovative program to its knees. Providing students with service options available at their request and addressing their immediate as well as long term support needs is critical to the success of the transformation process. Redesigning existing services to address the needs of the traditional as well as new on-line learner can tax even the most sophisticated support unit. Innovating in the use of technology, retraining staff and redefining the duration of available services is paramount to bridging the support requirements for both independent and cohort programs.

Conclusion

Penn State is committed to maintaining a print-based distance learning program that provides all who desire access to educational programming via an independent learning format. In addition, Penn State has expressed its leadership and vision in the design and development of academic programs that serve the life-long learning needs of working professional in a wide variety of disciplines. It is the mission of the World Campus to offer maximum flexibility to the distance learner to select from a variety of course delivery formats to meet their educational goals. As technology continues to serve as a catalyst and extend the reach of distance education, it provides the basis for new and expanded opportunities for learners to participate in active and collaborative learning communities. The question is not whether or not traditional distance education formats serve the needs of today’s learners, but rather, how do we construct and maintain ample learning opportunities to those engaged in the pursuit of life long learning.

Although the challenges and issues are complex, the role of distance education in our society is only now being discovered by the masses. Both independent and cohort/technology-based programs have much to offer. It does need to be one or the other. The realization that effective learning is not confined to a location or time zone and that the learner has choices as to where and when they participate puts the responsibilities squarely on the institutions to provide the experience and stand back and watch the learner excel!

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