VOLUME 8, NUMBER 2, 1994

Editorial
Autonomy and Interdependence
Michael G. Moore

Articles (for abstracts, click here)
In Support of a Functional Definition of Interaction
Ellen D. Wagner

Learner-Interface in teraction in Distance Education: An Extension of Contemporary Models and Strategies for Practitioners
Daniel C. A. Hillman, Deborah J. Willis, and Charlotte N. Gunawardena

Satisfaction and Completion in Correspondence Study: The Influence of Instructional and Student-Support Services
Frank D. Tallman

Providing a Human Biology Laboratory for Distant Learners
Don Naber and Glenn Leblanc

Interview
Speaking Personally with Parker Rossman
Karen Murphy

Book Review
Reaching LearnersThrough Telecommunications
by Becky S. Duning, M. J. Van Kekerix, and L. M. Zaborowski
Thomas C. Reeves

Media Review
Mosaic: A Hypertext Tool for Navigating the Internet
John Cochenour

EDITORIAL
Autonomy and Interdependence
Michael G. Moore

When I began to write about learner autonomy-the potential of distant learners to participate in the determination of their learning objectives, the implementation of their programs of study, and the evaluation of their learning-it was at a time when teaching at a distance was heavily dominated by the ideas of behavioral psychology. Since learners were beyond the immediate environment of the teacher, the main problem of distance education became how to optimally control them. Instructors were urged to identify their goals in very specific behavioral terms, to prescribe a regime of presentation, practice, and reward, and to test and measure the achievement of all students according to the precise standards built into the objectives. The challenge for the educator was to produce a perfect set of objectives, techniques, and testing devices that would fit every one of a large number of learners at a distance: no one would deviate, no one would fall between the cracks.

While there were, and remain, many useful design techniques in the behaviorist approach, a correction was needed that regarded the idiosyncracies and independence of learners as valuable resources rather than as a distracting nuisance. To replace the model in which passive subjects-the learners-were trained by irresistably elegant instructional tools, distance education had to be reconceptualized as a more open partnership of teachers and self-directing learners in which individual learners initiated, conducted, and controlled much of the learning process.

My 1972 presentation to the conference of the International Council for Correspondence Education (the predecessor of the International Council for Distance Education) was called "Learner Autonomy: the Second Dimension of Independent Study." In that presentation I suggested that learners have different capacities for making decisions about their own learning and that designers of what we would now call distance education programs should take into account those abilities and work with them. The ability of a learner to develop a personal learning plan in some ways different from that of others, or the ability to find resources for study in one's own work or community environment, or the ability to decide for oneself when progress is satisfactory, should not be treated as extraneous and regrettable noise in a smooth-running, instructor-controlled system, but rather should be seen as powerful energy to be engaged by the instructional designers. Further, learner autonomy should be a goal of distance education. We should consider it good for learners to be self-directing and try to devise ways of encouraging and supporting them. That does not mean that all learners are self-directing; however, since each has an ability and a potential to be self-directing, the educational program should attempt to identify and build on these. There is no doubt that devising a program that supports learners' self-direction is even more difficult than is producing one that controls.

In the years since I first wrote about learner autonomy we have experienced the telecommunications revolution, as well as the Open University movement, in distance education. Because of these technical and organizational innovations, distance learning is not, or need not be, always the individual, lonely activity it used to be. The Open Universities have invented study centres and have built networks of tutor-counselors and learner self-help groups, which are organizational structures that provide for peer group activities. A similar effect has been produced in North America by the development of audio, audiographic, computer and video teleconferencing. These technologies give us the ability to link instructors with groups of learners as well as with individuals, and to link individual learners into virtual groups. Distance educators still face the important challenge of engaging with individual students in ways that build on and develop personal learning autonomy.

Equally exciting is the process of developing and engaging interdependence among individuals in distant groups, developing group interdependence within a total system, and developing distant-group autonomy. Problems of autonomy and interdependence center on curriculum, instruction, and interpersonal dynamics (I assume that technologies work!). In a typical U.S. course that uses teleconferencing technologies to link, let us say, six sites, the curriculum problem is how to integrating the local interests and needs, as well as the local knowledge that lies at each site, into the content to be taught. The instructional problem is how to involve each distant site in determining and implementing objectives. I have not yet heard of any better strategy than to devise local group projects.

In teaching my courses, I depend heavily on having each local group decide on a topic or task for presentation to the larger group, i.e., the virtual "class." In teaching research for example, I have each group decide on a research question to develop locally and present to the "class." In teaching design, I have each group design a module that they "teach" to the rest of the "class." Simple though this sounds, a great deal of care must go into managing the process as distant groups struggle, sometimes flounder, and eventually become organized to accomplish their goals. Generally, I have had happy results with this strategy. Students acquire insights into the distilled wisdom of the literature from the experience of working on their tasks, and they become attached to each other as group members as a result of the mutual struggle.

Predicting which groups will be more successful seems to have little to do with what I have done as an instructional designer. The likelihood of a local site becoming a successful learning group is primarily a result of individual personalities, the level of learner autonomy of group members, and the interpersonal dynamics within the group. Given identical assignments, some groups respond with an extraordinarily high degree of competence, commitment, energy, and creativity while others do not. The former give time far in excess of what is expected, are task oriented, productive, and continue to communicate informally by e-mail and in other ways, seeming to have fun working together. Surely there can be no better indication that a virtual class has succeeded than that the students do not want to dissolve it when the course ends.

A class that I teach, comprised of nine sites, has petitioned to keep its computer bulletin board active during the summer break; the members wish to continue their interdependent, peer instruction informally during the vacation period. As an instructor it would be nice to claim that this creative environment is part of the plan, but what needs to be explained is why the local environment is much more positive in some sites than in others of the same "class." To a large extent, it seems to depend on the personalities of the group members, in particular on the degree of personal autonomy of the individuals. Successful groups exhibit a high degree of interdependence among relatively autonomous individuals. In many groups the interdependent members cluster around an informal leader, who acts as alocal chairperson, guiding discussion and decision making in an environment characterised by a high degree of participation, division of labor, and collaboration. Sometimes there are no particular leaders, but group members devise ways to share leadership responsibilities. Being relatively autonomous learners, the members of the successful group are likely to have sufficient understanding of the instructional process to be good collaborators with the distant instructor. Problems seem to occur when someone wants a leadership role and is rejected or when two or more people compete for leadership, or when the level of autonomy among the group members is so low that no one is able to lead the decision making process. If there are individuals who have difficulty in collaborating with others or who, instead of accepting informal local leadership look for control from the distant instructor, the situation might become volatile.

The interdependence of the instructor's role and that of the learners is nowhere more evident than in the working of local study groups. The distant instructor can do everything possible to design and encourage an environment that allows for productive activities locally, but, in the end, students must make the environment work for themselves. Much research is needed to find out more about the characteristics of effective distant learning groups in order to be able to train both instructors and students in the knowledge and skills needed to make such groups successful.

Afterward
At the end of every "virtual class," we experience the bitter-sweet emotion of separation from people with whom we have communicated very intensely, perhaps emotionally, for many weeks. This is perhaps suprising to those who think that distance education is impersonal; in fact,the very opposite is often true. At the end of a recent course, one of the participants expressed his thoughts on the class computer bulletin board in the form of a poem. I hope you will agree that it is worth sharing with a wider audience than his "classmates."

ABSTRACTS

In Support of a Functional Definition of Interaction
Ellen D. Wagner

A common theme in the distance education literature is that delivery technologies with the potential for real-time interactivity will improve both the image and practice of distance education. Although there appears to be a growing acceptance of a causal relationship between system interactivity and instructional interaction, neither concept has been clearly or functionally defined. This article discusses several systems models and relates them to the contexts of instructional delivery, instructional design, instructional theory, and learning theory in an attempt to establish conceptual parameters for the function of interaction.

Learner-Interface Interaction in Distance Education: An Extension of Contemporary Models and Strategies for Practitioners
Daniel C. A. Hillman, Deborah J. Willis, and Charlotte N. Gunawardena

Most treatments of the concept of interaction in distance education have been based on Moore's (1989) discussion of three types of interaction: learner-content, learner-instructor, and learner-learner. However, these previous discussions have failed to consider the interaction that occurs between the learner and the technologies used to deliver instruction. This article presents the concept of learner-interface interaction and recommends instructional design strategies that will facilitate students' acquisition of the skills needed to participate effectively in the electronic classroom.

Satisfaction and Completion in Correspondence Study: The Influence of Instructional and Student-Support Services
Frank D. Tallman

Correspondence education can provide college-level instruction that is efficient, economical, and sensitive to the changing needs of traditional and adult learners. However, to ensure the development of the educational environment necessary for effective education to occur, providers need to be aware of factors that contribute to student satisfaction and persistence in correspondence education. This article examines the relationship between student satisfaction and course completion in relation to the provision and perceived quality of instructional and student-support services.

Providing a Human Biology Laboratory for Distant Learners
Don Naber and Glenn LeBlanc

This paper describes the development and pilot testing of a human biology laboratory course delivered over the Education Network of Maine. The project serves as an illustrative case of the general problem of teaching science laboratory courses at a distance. The development process is described within the framework of an instructional systems design (ISD) model. The model is described in some detail and the decisions and actions taken at each stage are outlined to provide a "snapshot" of the course and a description of the critical issues that were considered at various stages of the development process. Finally, the development team reflects on the experience and discusses some generally applicable issues that arise when considering the development of laboratory courses for distance delivery.

Back to Table of Contents and Abstracts