Trends in distance education

By Thomas J. Kriger 

As part of the ongoing debate over the merits of various forms of distance education, critics of asynchronous courses and programs within higher education have recently found unexpected support in the corporate sector. In an interesting counterpoint to the seemingly relentless trend toward "e"-everything, corporate analysts have expressed growing skepticism in recent months over the merits of completely asynchronous courses and virtual training.

Why the skepticism?  The answer is that corporate trainees --like some college students and faculty unions--have expressed dissatisfaction with the quality of courses delivered solely via the Internet or by asynchronous courses and courseware. As Michael Rosenberg warns in e-learning magazine:

The truth is, in any large organization near you, learners may find themselves in offerings upon offerings of strictly Web-based, asynchronous courseware. They may be asked to access and take all of this available training on their own time. Do not let this happen to your company.

In response to these criticisms, corporate trainers have turned to blended learning (BL), the latest hot topic in corporate training and higher education circles alike. BL is defined as a combination of face-to-face teaching with software and Web-based teaching. As Elaine Voci, a corporate training director, explains in e-learning magazine: BL is "the term favored for describing an optimal learning environment in which we leverage the power of the Internet and Web-based instruction with more traditional ones, such as classroom instruction, to get the best of both worlds."

The main problem with completely asynchronous training courses, corporate analysts point out, is that they disregard the fact that education is best accomplished face-to-face. It is important to note that the AFT made this argument a few years ago, in its 2000 report, "Distance Education: Guidelines for Good Practice."  As the report explains, "opportunities, same-time same-place interchange between the teacher and the student, or among students, should be built into credit courses taught at a distance." Why? The reason, as James Mathewson explains in ComputerUser, is that "there is no technological substitute for time with an instructor. Teleconferencing and other advanced collaboration tools can reduce the need for face time. But you just can't eliminate face time without degrading the learning experience."

According to its proponents, the main advantage of BL is that it allows corporate trainers (and higher education faculty as well) to integrate the advantages of face-to-face classroom interactions with positive characteristics of distance learning. These distance education positives include greater accessibility for students with busy schedules, the opportunity for shy students to participate more in class "discussions," the self-paced nature of the curriculum, and, perhaps most important for corporate trainers, reduced travel and lodging costs.

BL, however, refers to much more than a simple mix of teaching styles. Writing in Training and Development magazine, Zenger and Uehlein pose the question: "What constitutes a truly blended solution?" Their answer is that blended learning, for it to be effective, must be a well-thought out and designed methodology. One characteristic is a "completely integrated instructional design." For higher education, the implication is that a traditional course that has been videotaped for online distribution or a course that contains a few online assignments would not qualify under this rubric.

As Zenger and Uehlein explain: "A blended solution doesn't occur when you just bolt on some e-learning modules to an instructor-led session. It's only when the pieces fit together logically like finely machined parts of an engine that you create a real blended solution." Other characteristics of fully developed BL include a "consistent framework and nomenclature" for different courses and the goal of using different teaching methods to their maximum advantage.

This shift in emphasis to BL within the distance education debate represents a vindication of those critics--including the members of AFT--who have argued for greater faculty control over distance education. The shift to BL brings the craft of teaching back to the center of this debate, and underscores the importance of skilled teachers in both corporate training and higher education. With their recent focus on BL, corporate analysts are now saying something that AFT members--those people who are trained and best qualified to practice this craft--have been saying for a number of years.

Next month, this page will feature tips on the pedagogy of blended learning.

Thomas J. Kriger is director of research/legislation for the United University Professions/NYSUT/ AFT, the faculty and staff union at the State University of New York.