May 2004
Volume 21, Number 1
Patrick R. Lake, Editor
Christine
Vanchella & Roberta S. Lacefield,
As faculty
living and working in rural Georgia, attending conferences and workshops usually
Reviewing
this list, we were simultaneously struck with the same question – “Haven’t
we heard this before?”
Our mutual question was framed in the context of our experiences as a
psychologist and an adult educator, and we felt that the keys for
successful online learning specified in the book mirrored our understanding of
the keys to adult learning in general and were being rediscovered in the context
of learning online. Is this the case? Were these the same key items we thought
we remembered from adult education research?
Is there something special about the online environment that makes it
different from traditional learning environments or are the important elements
the same?
The search for an answer to these questions led us to a re-examination of
current research and thought regarding adult learning and education. What we
found was that Palloff and Pratt’s key elements
sounded very similar to those mentioned in our review of the literature
(Knowles, 1984; Brookfield, 1986; Chickering & Gamson, 1987; Wlodkowski
& Ginsberg, 1995; Merriam & Caffarella, 1999; Dononvan et al, 1999).
Our review identified six recurring themes: the instructor’s role in
providing direction, guidance, and feedback; extent to which the course
establishes and encourages student-faculty and student-student interaction;
relevance of material to learners; quality of course content; extent to which
course addresses multiple learning styles and aids development of metacognition;
and, inclusion of opportunities for self-directed learning.
Palloff & Pratt |
|
· Honesty · Responsiveness · Relevance · Respect · Openness · Empowerment |
· Instructor’s role in providing direction, guidance, feedback · Student-faculty and student-student interaction · Relevance of material to learners · Quality of course content · Recognition of multiple learning styles · Development of metacognitive skills · Opportunities for self-directed learning |
This
review confirmed our original belief in the underlying commonalities.
Though we act as if teaching online is somehow different from teaching
face-to-face, the fact of the matter is that the research shows the same key elements in both. So,
we asked ourselves, if online education isn’t truly any different, why is it
driving a renewed interest in the research and an imperative for change?
We believe the consumer demand for online
education, supported by decreasing costs and increasing availability of
technology, is the primary external pressure forcing educational reform
today. This is a powerful
realization--powerful because academia is facing the next stage in its
evolution. External forces are
driving change, and change will come whether we are ready or not.
And, change is always difficult.
Why is it difficult? John P. Kotter, in an article from the Harvard Business
Review on Change entitled Leading Change: Why Transformation Efforts Fail,
gives us insight into the nature of this difficulty when he states, “Reform
generally demands activity outside of formal boundaries, expectations, and
protocol.” Therein lies the
problem. Academia, including
student experience, is grounded in formality and protocol, which reinforces the
status quo. Therefore, we persist
in the use of our familiar, comfortable methods.
Many of us continue to use the traditional lecture format with objective
assessment of textbook and lecture material.
Yet, we sense that these are no longer the most effective methods,
particularly in our increasingly complex and diverse environments.
Teaching online forces us to confront this new environment.
The problem is that many of us approach this new
frontier with the old paradigm. When
faced with this opportunity for real change, our fear of change prompts us to
simply use our old methods in a new environment.
Why do we do this? Instead
of addressing this question, we drift our focus into ‘proving’ that the
online course is worthy and equal to the face-to-face class rather than truly
examining the effectiveness of our strategies in either setting.
In contrast to those who fear change, there are those who embrace change.
Some of us have eagerly adopted the technological advancements in
education. Change appears to
come easy to those who jump in, adding all kinds of ‘bells and whistles’ to
their courses. Yet when, and
more importantly if, we critically examine these changes, there often is little
evidence of the utility of the change for the learner.
In this sense, change can also be dangerous.
If the change is surface change only, not driven by sound theory and
principle, then we have truly made no change at all.
We drift from our intention of using technology meaningfully to using it
gratuitously - technology for its own sake.
Our conclusions about the effectiveness of the technology are too easily focused on how new, interesting, or clever it is, rather
than how well it supports student learning. We should be asking, “Do the
technological changes support what research has told us are the key elements
necessary for student learning?”
There is a danger that we will focus our limited time and energy on irrelevant
surface issues. Resources are
limited, and real change is demanding of our time.
This time demand is
clearly evident in other human domains. For
example, we can observe the experiences of business and learn many lessons.
Again in the words of Kotter, “change involves numerous phases that,
together, usually take a long time. Skipping
steps creates only an illusion of speed.”
A similar lesson regarding
the relationship between change and time is available in human development.
We understand that we cannot force maturation.
It happens at its own pace, influenced by the environment of the organism
and its readiness for change. With
these lessons from business and human development in mind, why would we expect
authentic change in teaching to happen quickly?
Online
education allows change because it is new; there are no formal limits, no
standard practices, no single ‘right way.’ It provides us with a grand opportunity to shape education
that reflects our current knowledge and research about the way adults learn –
to reengineer education rather than use our old, obsolete practices in a new
environment. It is an opportunity we cannot allow to pass us by.
Before
we simply
reinvent online education in our own image, we must take a moment to ask
ourselves some questions. Have we
made a scholarly examination of our teaching?
Do we recognize the opportunities for modification of our current
teaching style? Are we taking the time to progress through the necessary stages?
Are we ready to experience real change?
Only by considering these questions honestly and openly will we ensure
our survival in an ever-changing, competitive, and complex educational
environment.
Christine M. Vanchella is a freelance writer and an Adjunct Professor
at South Georgia College
(Douglas, Ga.) and
References
Brookfield, S. (1986) Understanding
and Facilitating Adult Learning. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Chickering, AW, & Gamson,
Z.F. (1987) Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education. AAHE
Bulletin, 39(7), 3-7.
Donovan, M. S., J. D.
Bransford, & Pellegrino, J. W., ed’s. (1999) How People Learn: Bridging
Research and Practice. Washington DC: National Academy Press.
Knowles, M. S. (1984) Andragogy
in Action: Applying Modern
Principles of Adult Learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Kotter, J. P. (1998). Leading
Change: Why Transformation Efforts Fail. In Harvard Business Review on
Change. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Publishing.
Merriam, S. B. &
Caffarella, R. S. (1999). Learning in Adulthood: A Comprehensive Guide, 2nd
ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, Inc.
Palloff, R. M. & Pratt, K.
(1999) Building Learning Communities in Cyberspace: Effective Strategies for
the Online Classroom. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Wlodkowski, R. J. & Ginsberg, M. E. (1995) Diversity and Motivation: Culturally Responsive Teaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
###