Individual or group interaction is necessary when the students choose online study for its convenience but may not be ready for online learning because they have not developed self-directedness and maturity required for success (Brindley). Therefore, they have to go through some readiness assessment, or they have to learn some prerequisite skills. Although, how much institutions are responsible for the success of online students, remains an open question. Of course, it is essential for schools to interfere early to minimize dropouts, but the students’ ability to self-discipline is as important. Some students need group work and instructor support while others work just as efficiently with online material on their own.
Students’ cultural diversity is one of the most influential factors of distance education success. This is when communication of empathy with the learner is very important because when the students are independent but are supported by ‘voice’ in self-study materials and/or written feedback by the instructor, they are guided in the right direction. They know what is expected from them and how well they perform in their self-study process (Brindley). For example, I grew up in Russia, and I am bilingual. I have never had to read so much in English as I do now, let alone taking online classes. My military career forced me to consider distance education as a possible way of obtaining education. My first online course was a disaster. I could not find anything; I was terrible at following what I needed to complete. However, now I do not need as much learner support as I needed before. That is why I think some type of learner support is necessary, in some cases a little more than in the others. References Brindley, J. (2014). Learner support in online distance education: Essential and evolving. In O. Zawacki-Richter & T. Anderson (Eds.), Online distance education: Towards a research agenda (pp. 287-310). Retrieved from http://www.aupress.ca/books/120233/ebook/11_Zawacki-Richter_Anderson_2014-Online_Distance_Education.pdf
0 Comments
Generally, institutions are much quicker at preparing online lessons and overall curriculum than equally accessible online learner support services. However, lately, the progress in learner support both online and on-campus has been significant:
In 1989 Holmberg offered the concept of guided didactic conversation which allowed the student to be independent but guided by study materials and instructors. Sewarts (1993) also offered a concept of continuity of concern, when the same tutor-councilor addressed both non-academic and academic concerns of a student through the entire term of a student studies. This model was mainly supported at the Open University, United Kingdom (OUUK) (Brindley, 2014). However, in North America administrative form of support was separated from academic and was carried out by separate staff (Brindley, 2014). In 1978, Vygotsky came up with the theory of shared discourse that shifted mostly towards the learner and him taking control over his own studies. An example given by Brindley is distance education library services that provided not just access to resources but to teaching information literacy as well. Towards the same concept opted Moore and Kearsley (2012) recognizing that learners can take control of their own studies depending on their readiness to be autonomous – the theory of transactional distance. Web-based technologies provided bases for more interaction among students and with the instructor (Brindley, 2014). The cultural diversity of students presented some challenges for learner’s support systems development as well. However, Brindley (1987) discovered that the students who persisted in their online studies had the same personal or geographical challenges as the ones who dropped out. Therefore, cultural heterogeneity of students did not prove to be a major problem for learners and their persistence continuity (Brindley, 2014). Student satisfaction surveys and need assessment played a significant role in learners’ support practices. For example, in a survey at the New York Institute of Technology, the online students expressed a desire for additional services such as clubs, newspapers, online tutoring, etc., which often leads to appearing of new additional learners’ support services and counselings (Brindley, 2014). Tait (2004) also wrote an article on how to improve learner’s support through cognitive, effective, and systemic domains – all three included learner characteristics based on geography, scale, management system, and technological infrastructure (Brindley, 214). Simpson, on the other hand, also proposed a new theory, Proactive Motivational Support (PAMs), that relies heavily on proactive interaction with learners in order to identify their strengths to learning. Later on, Boyle, Kwon, Ross, and Simpson (2010) studied peer-to-peer mentoring support which resulted in higher persistence of students choosing online studies. Peer-to-peer support is also critical for students choosing MOOC. Peers help online students to deepen their learning experience (Brindley, 2014). No research says that only one specific study led to the development of online support systems. It is one of those fields that continues to progress and widen every day, and it will continue to encounter future challenges as online community grows and develops. However, support systems are definitely becoming more proactive and affective (Brindley, 2014) References Brindley, J. (2014). Learner support in online distance education: Essential and evolving. In O. Zawacki-Richter & T. Anderson (Eds.), Online distance education: Towards a research agenda (pp. 287-310). Retrieved from http://www.aupress.ca/books/120233/ebook/11_Zawacki-Richter_Anderson_2014-Online_Distance_Education.pdf Unit 1: How can a library help learners to develop information literacy and research skills?2/27/2018 Library services nowadays are entirely different from what library services were ten years ago. If before students had to go to the library and ask the librarian to help them to find specific physical books, now everything can be done online. However, the workload goes both ways – the librarians have to know how to work the Web to help the students at a distance, and the students have to know how to search online resources to find the particular material.
The library services have to know how to help the students with searching and locating resources for assignments, teach them to learn how to use those resources and support their educational needs. Another critical role of online library services is to provide technical support like tutorials on the library web pages or hands-on training on various programs. Both students and librarians need to know how software programs work to be able to utilize online resources. The reason for it is that online libraries include not only books and articles but also online instructions on how to navigate to specific sites, videos, tutorials, television, and blogs. Library online services are designed to help students from all walks of life, from different time-zones and financial income. That is why they should be accessible 24/7. Each school library services continuously experiment with delivery methods to determine what works best to deliver course contents properly. Therefore, each online library is different in different schools. That is why digital library resources often provide learners with information on how to access library resources to be able to meet each school’s guidelines (Corbett & Brown, 2015). Because there are so many schools with online library services, there was a need for institutions to create a single sign-on into library databases to allow users one username and password to make it easier for them to access library services of particular schools the students attend (Corbett & Brown, 2015). Not only students use online library database. Faculty members, administrators, tutors, and staff members use them on a regular basis, if not more, as well. They cannot give the material to students knowing they are not able to find it online, or without providing them with a “link” to it. That is why the Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) developed “Standards for Distance Learning Library Services”, which were approved by the ACRL Board in July 2008 that states that every college member is entitled to library services regardless of what part of the world they enrolled in, as long as they are members of that institution. It also allowed for an embedded librarian who provides learners with instructions on how to access the library and how to efficiently choose the reliable sources. Today, it is not enough to merely rely on Google search engine, but the students and staff members can always ask the librarian for help in identifying a reliable source. It is essential for librarians to keep up-to-date with research and technological skills to be able to assist the students and faculty members with continuing education and developing further opportunities (Corbett & Brown, 2015). References Corbett, A., & Brown, A. (2015). The roles that librarians and libraries play in distance education settings. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 18(2). Retrieved from http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/summer182/corbett_brown182.html Every DE institution either has registry administrators or an online self -registry option that goes through a registrar system. A registry administrator is responsible for a registry, managing users and accounts, assurance and cancellations, often marketing, transfers, and any reported issues.
Roughly it is possible to distinguish three levels of registry administrations. - Level 1: When only registry administrators have access to the system. Users do not have personal direct access to it. Only the registrar manages users accounts. It is very safe because the registrar composes a file on each user, often a paper of that school database file that is only accessible by one person which makes it fraud risk low. - Level 2: The registry is fully computerized with the automation. In this case, user interfaces are provided and can be accessed through the Internet. However, the execution of operations requires the involvement of the administrator. The risk of accounts holding, and fraud is moderate in this case. - Level 3: This level is the most complicated for the registrars because they do not have complete control. Online users have access to registry system without a registrar. This registry is automated, and a large volume of information is exchanged. A large volume of information goes through the registry system, especially in Distance Education. Therefore, it is important for each school to have a very organized system to keep track of the students and to avoid chaos. References Dinguirard, F., & Brookfield, P. (2015). Setting the institutional framework for transaction registry administration. Partnership for Market Readiness. Retrieved from https://www.thepmr.org/system/files/documents/2015%2009%2009%20PMR_RegistryWS_BackgroundNote2_Admin.pdf The early days of the internet brought a lot of frustration on its early users, especially among online student communities. Such things as instability across the telecommunication systems, difficult user interfaces or navigational issues, and disjointed online communication were just a few that caused that frustration that was also combined with the lack of technical support (Berge, 2013).
Web 2.0 stylet became standard in the 1990s. Web 2. 0 allowed web pages to move beyond the standard static documents. It allows the use of gradients, colorful icons, reflections, drop shadows, etc., - all were collected to design tutorials and the like (Morrow, 2016). Web 2.0 aims to broaden the e-skills and competencies of teachers and tutors and helps them to create adequate online training without time and distance barriers. They also integrate the social media in their courses’ curriculum. The utilization of social media in Web 2.0 enhances the communication between the students giving them the opportunity to create, share, and exchange information and ideas in virtual communities and networks almost instantly. However, We. 2.0 if often underutilized due to the lack of training on how to use those tools. This is the biggest challenge of the technology because students and especially teachers lack training and familiarity with the web technologies which often prevent their educational utilization and development (Perikos, Grivokostopoulou, Kovas, & Hatzilygeroudis, 2015). However, in most cases chances are, we all have already used Web 2.0 tools without realizing that they are Web 2.0 tools. For example, what you read in the online encyclopedia is static and most probably a Web 1.0 tool, but what you read on Wikipedia is dynamic (Web 2.0). It lets users make changes to make explanations more accurate and comprehensive. Therefore, Web 2.0 tools can generate more powerful and full content. Students these days are probably using Web 2.0 tools in their daily lives. Such devices as Doodle, Twitter, or Pinterest are often used daily, primarily by the “newest” generations. Web 2.0 tools allow users to collaborate, generate, and upload content. It is an excellent tool to engage learners and help foster a community of learning in any course. For instance, using mind mapping tools like Prezi or Popplet help students brainstorm ideas asynchronously and synchronously. Teachers and students have access to multiple presentation tools that help them to transfer knowledge more efficiently. For example, for my presentations, I use Prezi.com because it is more dynamic and has a lot more features than a regular PowerPoint. I have just discovered GoAnimate, which is a cartoon/animation building tool that I can use for videos and more detailed visual explanations. Although not a lot of teachers and students know all the features of Web 2.0, they do not even realize that they have been using them in everyday life for quite some time. References Berge, Z. (2013). Barriers to communication in distance education. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 14(1), 374-388. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/286122039_Barriers_to_communication_in_distance_education Morrow, K. (2016). Web 2.0, Web 3.0, and the Internet of Things. uxbooth.com http://www.uxbooth.com/articles/web-2-0-web-3-0-and-the-internet-of-things/ Perikos, I., Grivokostopoulou, F., Kovas, K., & Hatzilygeroudis, I. (2015). Assisting tutors to utilize Web 2.0 tools in education. ERIC. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED562502.pdf Web 2.0 tools in teaching and learning. (2018). University Center for Teaching and Learning. Retrieved from https://teaching.pitt.edu/blog/web-2-0-tools-in-teaching-and-learning/ Michael G. Moore and Greg Kearsley wrote in their article “Distance Education: A Systems Approach View – Tutoring” that the primary reason for having online tutors is to provide students with individualized instructions. Very often the tutor is the only person the student interacts with throughout the course. They may have many functions: discussing course content with a student, providing feedback on progress, grading of assignment/tests, helping students plan their work, etc. Although, not all students take advantage of tutoring services. The tutors often serve as a bridge between students and the institution to help the students to interpret polices and solve problems or difficulties they might encounter. Also, in some programs, the tutor does not even have any specific course-related duties, and his/her primary job is to provide counseling and guidance, which is often very important due to difficulties the distance learners encounter. The role of a counselor/tutor in much more important in DE than in traditional face-to-face education (Moor & Kearsley, 1996).
Teachers in DE must accomplish the same goals as in the conventional environment, but they face specific challenged due to separation from the learner. For example, the learner is often insecure in the absence of a teacher, which is the main course of such phenomenon as “drop-out”. Therefore, the teacher has to take extra measures to ensure the course is very well structured taking in consideration clear objectives and students’ time (Moore & Kearsley, 1996). As Moore and Kearsley (2012) state later on, there is a big difference between distance education and distance learning. DE is the responsibility of an institution and the instructor. Distance learning, on the other hand, is what the students do and it is their responsibility. Therefore, in DE there are many communication barriers the teachers have to overcome to achieve effective communication (Berge, 2013): - Cognitive distance – the more cognitive distance there is, the more challenging it is for both parties to achieve concept development through discussion. - Contextual distance - when one context is presented at a distance and understood differently than it would be in an authentic situation. - Cultural distance – when people have patterns of thought different from one another and to make the learning process clear an instructor has to break through those differences. - Emotional distance – the students often feel fear, distrust, and suspicion towards DE. - Pedagogical distance – involves transactional distance that causes challenges in understanding and teaching/learning. - Physical distance - Psychological distance – a subjective feeling of distance with a person. - Social distance – perceive a difference in class. - Technical distance – access to technology across various people. - Temporal distance – distance in time zones (Berge, 2013 p. 376). All these barriers to communication in DE often make the work of teachers and tutors more complicated. Although tutoring is one of many learner support systems, quite often the function of both, teachers and tutors, can be equally important. References Berge, Z. (2013). Barriers to communication in distance education. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 14(1), 374-388. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/286122039_Barriers_to_communication_in_distance_education Moore, M.G. & Kearsley, G. (1996). Distance Education: A Systems View. Wadsworth Publishers, pp. 146-51.Retrieved from http://web.worldbank.org/archive/website00236B/WEB/TUT_01.HTM |