presented at the International Congress of Education, Technology and
Change, Santiago de Cali,
June 11th to 14th 1999
Hartwig Stein
hstein@campus.ruv.itesm.mx
Instituto Tecnológico y de Estudios Superiores de Monterrey
(I.T.E.S.M.)
The paper exemplifies a virtual education model and defends the idea,
that virtual education has not necessarily "significant impact when regarded
an alternative for the improvement of education quality in communities
with low economic resources" as stated in the conference announcement.
A focus on technology and investments in technology in education are more
likely to foster inequalities, social privileges and dependency on first
world countries. Inappropriate methodology and a poor vision of possibilities
could make this concept an inefficient but expensive approach to solve
problems in education.
Under certain circumstances, a special conception of virtual university
could be helpful to solve problems of communities with low economic resources.
Two scenarios will be presented here.
1 Introduction
The possibilities that information technology offers to improve education
are described in several recent publications (Oblinger & Rush, 1998;
Harasim, Hiltz, Teles, and Turoff, 1995). Often these descriptions are
anecdotal, lack evidence or depend only on the opinion of some participants
of the specific courses or events, sometimes captured by standardized surveys
(Moore and Kearsley, 1996). Some of these reports are written by people
with an interest in a positive evaluation of the technology involved in
those courses. There is no significant scientific evidence that technology
applied to teaching has in general a positive impact on learning outcomes.
A theoretical model of the important elements of a virtual learning
environment could foster the understanding, under which circumstances the
use of technology could lead to significant learning outcomes.
2 The problem of current descriptions of the impact of technology / The need of a theoretical model of "Virtual University"
A marvelous world of education is unfolding in our minds reading the
words of Oblinger (1998):
Convening in a large group provides a sense of excitement, which the
professor reinforces by using state-of-the-art multimedia to illustrate
and punctuate important points-the students will remember these sessions
many years later when much of the detail that comes later will have faded.
Next the student embarks on a series of interactive studio individual
exercises using simulation and multimedia applications (supplemented with
the familiar textbook) to develop competence in the course’s first module.
(p.12-13)
This learning scenario which Oblinger describes is fictional. It requires
several prerequisites, which are not naturally part of a today’s learning
environment. The teacher has to be a content expert, a media specialist
and a skilled pedagogue to involve students in such kind of learning experiences.
One may find all that skills in a team of experts which are working together
on one course. Success would depend then on effective collaboration of
that team.
The following are only some of the requirements which students should
fulfill to take part in the described activities:
- computer skills
- written expression
- autoregulation habits
- communication skills
For “independent student work” and “small group discussions” (p. 13)
participants need to have experienced this kind of work and developed some
personal security in its performance. If students lack skills, the work
of the teacher increases compared to a traditional classroom.
Terms like “technology-based independent work” only clarify the authors
misunderstanding of actual educational needs. The independent work may
be based on the autonomy of the student or effective tutoring systems,
but not on the self-sufficiency of an electronic tool.
The better publications (Research Report on the Effectiveness of Technology
in Schools, 1999) announce at least some circumstances and conditions under
which the use of technology would be useful, like "careful planning and
frequent interaction among students and the teacher" (items that match
for a "normal" classroom, too), "extensive training in the integration
of technology with the curriculum" for educators, and others.
Significant positive impact on education, significant positive effects
on achievement and positive effects on student attitudes toward learning
as on student self-concept can only be taken as evidence with an explanation
how these variables have been measured.
All these types of descriptions are not helpful to reflect about the
circumstances under which virtual education would be useful for the development
of third world countries. They confuse the process of decision making and
overestimate the power of technology to change educational practices.
3 Description of a model of Virtual University
A model identifies important elements of a context or reality and establishes
relationships between those objects with the purpose to explain reality.
Theoretical models should be presented to public scrutiny to verify, if
they explain reality better than other models.
First I will characterize the parts of the model, one describing the
structure and one the pedagogical operation. After a short explanation
of the elements, some relationships between these will be established (Figure
1).
3.4 Scenarios of Virtual University for "significant impact when regarded an alternative for the improvement of education quality in communities with low economic resources"
To illustrate the usefulness of the model two scenarios of educational
settings will be demonstrated. The model can be used to exemplify many
educational approaches to virtual university.
3.4.1 Scenario A
1. Communities with low economic resources buy standardized curricula
from education providers, believing that this somehow will fit their needs
and that this might be a low cost solution.
2. Providing Organizations are selected with criteria like prestige
and marketing or market presence. Foreign providers are preferred because
higher quality of their products is expected.
3. Media is selected regarding its "glimmer". The newer and more sophisticated
a technology, the better it may be.
4. The work team should fit into institutional requirements. Open discourse
about methods and educational outcomes is not desired, collaboration with
the requesters of the service is not seen as necessary.
5. Interaction in the learning process is responsibility of the participants.
For the instruction team it is sufficient to offer the electronic spaces
for interaction. People who learn quietly without showing any visible activity
("lurkers") can be accepted. Massive courses with hundreds of students
are practicable because somehow all participants will interact with their
classmates.
6. Any heterogeneous group can be excepted in one course. Necessary
computer and communication skills may be attained during the course. Autonomy
for self-study somehow will develop during the course.
7. Courses can be evaluated by standardized assessment tools, final
projects and formal inquiry of the opinion of course participants about
their learning outcomes. The better the grades and opinion of participants
are, the better is the course.
3.4.2 Scenario B
1. Low economic resources need low cost solutions. Communities with
low economic resources should analyze their special educational needs and
ask virtual universities for courses that fit those special needs.
2. Providing Organizations should be selected regarding to their perspectives
and intentions. It should be possible to derive pedagogical and educational
perspectives and intentions from their operation. Local providers of any
service should be preferred.
3. Media should be selected with the criteria "cheap" and "easy to
use". Sophisticated media in many cases do not match the requirements for
low economy communities, regarding access, interactivity and maintenance.
4. The work team should be selected in respect to their experience
in adult and distance education. Collaboration with the requester of the
educational service in the planning process is essential.
5. Interaction in the learning process is fundamental to attain sophisticated
learning outcomes. Significant interaction and collaboration with teachers,
tutors and other students should be part of the learning environment. The
massive use of one way technology to teach hundreds of participants at
once is a low cost solution, which is not likely to cause significant learning
outcomes. In this case the use of books and videos is a much cheaper self
study alternative. In the past massive courses with thousands of participants
have been possible, because there was only little or no interaction between
participants and everybody was studying at his or her own pace. An application
of this massive approach to highly interactive multimedia courses cannot
be sustained by any facts.
6. The student profile should be analyzed before the planning process
to identify lack of skills of participants. The Design and Development
of the Learning Environment should take the student's profile into account
and at the same time foster required skills. In some cases, previous training
could be necessary.
7. Student real action should be evaluated continuously to guarantee
the expected learning outcomes, adaptations in the learning process should
be made if necessary.
4 Conclusions
For the improvement of education quality in communities with low economic
resources the perspective and intentions of the providing organization
are substantial. Only if some kind of altruistic and pedagogical intention
can be derived from the current educational programs and a pedagogical
perspective can be inferred by the program definition, virtual education
is adequate for poor communities.
Courses should fit the exact needs of a community. Standardized courses
normally do not match these needs. Courses should be elaborated and evaluated
together with members of the community, which will take the course. Cheap
and easy to use media like e-mail should be preferred. Before buying a
course it is necessary to verify if the participants have all necessary
skills and media for participation. Previous training might be inevitable.
These preconditions will help to focus on lowest cost solutions regarding
to the use of media, prices and instructional design of the courses.
The presented model helps to analyze important facts and its relationships
of virtual university. It fosters the process of decision-making, which
kind of virtual university and which kind of course may lead to "significant
impact when regarded an alternative for the improvement of education quality
in communities with low economic resources".
5 References
Harasim, L.M., Hiltz, St. R., Teles,
L., Turoff. M. (1995). Learning networks : A field guide to teaching and
learning online. MIT Press.
Moore, M. , Kearsley. G. (1996). Distance
Education: A Systems View. New York: Waldsworth Publishing Company
Oblinger, D. G., & Rush, S. C. (Eds.).
(1998). The future compatible campus. Bolton, MA: Anker Publishing Company,
Inc.
"1999 Research Report on the Effectiveness
of Technology in Schools: Executive Summary 6th Edition". http://www.spa.org/project/edu_pub/99effreport.htm