From: IN%"[email protected]" "DEOSNEWS - The Distance Education Online Sy
mp
osium" 17-JAN-1993 06:51:28.04
To: Howard Lawrence <[email protected]>
CC:
Subj: DEOSNEWS Vol. 3 No. 2
Message-id: <[email protected]>
Received: from JNET-DAEMON by PSUARCH.Bitnet; Sun, 17 Jan 93 06:50 EDT
Received: From PSUVM(MAILER) by PSUARCH with Jnet id 1427 for HRL@PSUARCH; Sun,
17 Jan 93 06:50 EDT
Received: from PSUVM.BITNET by PSUVM.PSU.EDU (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP
id 4407; Sun, 17 Jan 93 06:44:20 EST
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1993 12:36:58 +0100
From: "Morten F. Paulsen" <morten@xxxxxx>
Subject: DEOSNEWS Vol. 3 No. 2
Sender: DEOSNEWS - The Distance Education Online Symposium
<[email protected]>
To: Howard Lawrence <[email protected]>
Reply-to: DEOSNEWS - The Distance Education Online Symposium
<[email protected]>
X-To: deosnews@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
DEOSNEWS Vol. 3 No. 2. ISSN 1062-9416.
Copyright 1993 DEOS - The Distance Education Online Symposium
DEOSNEWS has 1325 subscribers in 46 countries.
This document has about 525 lines.
Published in collaboration with The American Journal of Distance Education
and The American Center for the Study of Distance Education
The Pennsylvania State University, College of Education
403 South Allen Street, Suite 206
University Park, Pennsylvania 16801-5202, U.S.A.
E-mail: MAK10@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Tel: +814-863-3764 Fax: +814-865-5878
DEOS was established with a grant from the Annenberg/CPB Project
and it is supported by NKI in Norway.
Editor: Morten Flate Paulsen, MORTEN@xxxxxx
NKI, Box 111, 1341 Bekkestua, Norway
To subscribe to DEOSNEWS and DEOS-L (a discussion forum), just post the
following commands to LISTSERV@PSUVM or LISTSERV@xxxxxxxxxxxxx:
SUBSCRIBE DEOSNEWS Your Full Name
SUBSCRIBE DEOS-L Your Full Name
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EDITORIAL
This issue of DEOSNEWS presents a computer scanned version of the final
article in my monograph "From Bulletin Boards to Electronic Universities:
Distance Education, Computer-Mediated Communication, and Online Education"
(Paulsen 1992). The article is a first attempt to develop a theory of
distance education attuned specifically to CMC. Focusing on the interplay
of independence and cooperation within the dimensions of time, space, pace,
medium, access, and curriculum within distance education contexts, it is
argued that computer conferencing can foster both freedom for the individ-
ual and group cooperation.
The Hexagon Of Cooperative Freedom:
A Distance Education Theory Attuned to Computer Conferencing
Morten Flate Paulsen
Introduction
This article presents a distance education theory based on existing
theoretical perspectives and discusses how it applies to computer confer-
encing. In an analysis of existing theories of distance education, Keegan
(1988a, 30) concluded that six major elements define a distance education
program:
- The separation of teacher and learner, which distinguishes it from
face-to-face learning;
- The influence of an educational organization, which distinguishes it
from private study;
- The use of technical media, usually print, to unite teacher and
learner and carry the educational content;
- The provision of two-way communication so that the student may benefit
from or even initiate dialogue;
- The possibility of occasional meetings for both didactic and social-
ization purposes; and
- The participation in an industrialized form of education which, if
accepted, contains the genus of radical separation of distance
education from other forms.
The implications of introducing CMC in distance education are discus-
sed for each of these elements by Mason and Kaye (1990). They conclude that
the use of CMC has three major implications for distance education:
- The breaking down of conceptual distinctions between distance educa-
tion and place-based education;
- The changing of traditional roles of faculty, administrative and
support staff, and adjunct tutors; and
- The provision of an opportunity, which never existed before, to create
a network of scholars, "space" for collective thinking, and access to
peers for socializing and serendipitous exchange.
These implications are so important that it is necessary to re-evaluate
traditional distance education theories and discuss how they attune to CMC.
Distance Education Theories
Many theoretical perspectives on distance education have been pres-
ented during the last twenty years. Keegan (1988b) identifies these three
theoretical positions:
- Theories of autonomy and independence,
- Theories of industrialization, and
- Theories of interaction and communication.
One representative theory in each position follows and the implication of
the theory for computer conferencing is discussed.
Theories of autonomy and independence. Moore's inductive analysis of
descriptions of two thousand instructional programs led to the development
of a theory on dialogue, structure, and autonomy (Moore 1991). Moore
perceives dialogue as interaction between learner and instructor, structure
as certain characteristics of course design, and autonomy as learner
independence. He argues that distance education organizations should
ideally give students maximum independence with regard to choice of aims,
objectives, study methods, and learning activities; study pace and pro-
gression; and evaluation (Moore 1983).
In a recent paper, Moore (1991) encourages analysis of the effects
computer conferencing has on dialogue, structure, and autonomy. First, the
introduction of group communication means that dialogue is no longer mere
communication between learner and instructor. Second, few courses have been
designed for computer conferencing; the majority have adapted their
structure from existing distance education courses or face-to-face courses.
Third, computer conferencing is devised for group activity, so too much
autonomy is not within its scope. However, the goal must be to devise
systems that support individual freedom as well as cooperative group
activity.
Theories of industrialization. Peters's (1988) applications of
industrial theory led him to conclude that the structure of distance
teaching is determined to a considerable degree by the principles of
industrialization, particularly by those of rationalization, division of
labor, and mass production; the teaching process is gradually restructured
through increasing mechanization and mass production. These changes account
for the emergence of the following structural propositions:
- The development of distance study courses is just as important as the
preparatory work taking place prior to the production process.
- The effectiveness of the teaching process is particularly dependent on
planning and organization.
- Courses must be formalized and expectations from students standard-
ized.
- The teaching process is largely objectified.
- The functions of academics teaching at a distance have changed
considerably vis-a-vis university teachers in conventional teaching.
- Distance study can only be economical with a concentration of the
available resources and a centralized administration. (Peters 1988,-
110)
At first sight, the theory of industrialization does not seem to apply
to computer conferencing. Bates (1991) states:
Third generation technologies (computer conferencing) are particularly
valuable where relatively small numbers of students are concerned,
since they avoid the high fixed production costs of the industrial
model, but they do not however bring the economies of scale of the
industrial model, unless the opportunities for interaction for an
individual student are dramatically curtailed. (p. 13)
So far, we have very limited knowledge about how computer conferencing
can be applied to mass education. We know, however, that computer conferen-
cing systems can handle thousands of users. Hence, in a discussion of
future electronic universities, this author describes how computer confer-
encing systems can be designed to support mass education (Paulsen 1992,
46).
Theories of interaction and communication. In his theory of guided
didactic conversation, Holmberg (1988) views the distance-study course and
its non-contiguous communication style as instruments of a "conversation-
like interaction between the student on the one hand and the tutor counsel-
lor of the supporting organization administering the study on the other"
(p. 115). Constant interaction (conversation) between the supporting
organization (authors, tutors, counselors) is both simulated and real:
simulated through the students' interaction with the pre-produced course
materials and real through written and/or telephone interaction with their
tutors and counselors.
Holmberg's theory is developed with a focus on correspondence courses
and one-to-one communication. Consequently, it does not give much consider-
ation to group communication. However, the theory can be developed further
to include group facilitation, and a number of authors have recommended
related facilitation techniques for computer conference courses.
To date, very little pre-produced course material is developed just
for computer conferencing. Most of the material is adapted directly from
existing face-to-face or correspondence courses. More work must be done in
the future to produce tailor-made material for computer conferencing
courses. An important feature of such material would be the potential for
asynchronous group interaction. On the other hand, experience has shown
that computer conferencing as currently implemented can be an excellent
medium for facilitating a guided didactic conversation between the stu-
dents, the tutors, and the supporting organization.
The Theory of Cooperative Freedom
The theory of cooperative freedom can be classified as a theory of
autonomy and independence, as described earlier in this article. It is
influenced by Knowles's (1970) theory of andragogy, which asserts that
adult learners perceive themselves as self-directing human beings and
define themselves in terms of their personal achievements and experiences.
The theory of cooperative freedom perceives both adult and juvenile
distance learners as motivated, self-directing students with a desire to
control their learning outcomes. Further, the theory applies to all three
categories of Houle's (1961) student motivational orientations: goal
oriented, activity oriented, and learning oriented.
McCreary (1990, 120) indicates how each of Houle's categories will
relate to computer conferencing systems. Goal-oriented participants will
perceive CMC as a way to "keep the edge" and to use state-of-the-art
technology to achieve their goals. Activity-oriented students cannot resist
the always-available online activity. Finally, knowledge-oriented people
may be motivated by access to all the up-to-date information and knowledge-
able people that CMC provides.
The theory of cooperative freedom suggests that, independent of
motivational orientation, distance students need cooperation as well as
freedom.
Cooperation. Houle (1984) states that education is a cooperative
rather than an operative art: it implies voluntary interaction among
individuals during learning. Even solitary students guiding their own
programs without the help of an instructor seek help and encouragement from
others. In a social setting, those who take part in an educational activity
should have some sense of collaboration in both planning and implementa-
tion:
At one extreme, this sharing is so complete that it requires a group
to decide everything that it does together. At the other extreme, the
sharing may be implicit in the teaching-learning situation, as when
many people flock to hear a lecturer. Those who attend vote with their
feet, as the saying goes, and one cannot assume from their physical
passivity and silence as they sit in the auditorium that they are not
cooperating fully in their instruction. (Houle 1984, 45)
Cooperation can be hard to achieve in distance education. A major
problem for many students is the loneliness that results from limited
access to student peers; the urge for individual freedom may intensify the
problem. However, new group communication technologies such as audio
conferencing, video conferencing, and computer conferencing have been
devised to facilitate cooperation at a distance.
Freedom. The theory of cooperative freedom is concerned with freedom
from restraints rather than freedom from oppression. It professes that
students should have a high level of freedom to choose rather than be
restrained by a rigid distance education program. It states that freedom is
crucial in distance education. For many people, the need for continuing
education and lifelong learning is increasing. Today's students, however,
often have full-time jobs and families to take care of and many are
reluctant to participate if it means relinquishing high-quality family life
and job achievements. They need flexible education: education that allows
them to combine job, family, and education in a manageable way.
Freedom is a complex construct. It has many facets and features. The
theory of cooperative freedom suggests that the facets of special import-
ance to distance education are time, space, pace, medium, access, and
curriculum. None of these can be described as dichotomous; each must be
perceived as a continuum. This article describes important features of
these six facets of freedom that program planners should consider when they
develop distance education programs based on computer conferencing. The
facets are presented and discussed as the Hexagon of Cooperative Freedom
(Figure 1).
Cooperative freedom is a fabricated term. At first sight, it seems
self-contradictory. "Cooperative" indicates group interaction, though
"freedom" implies individual autonomy. Yet, if we could develop a distance
education system that combines freedom for the individual with group
cooperation, we would attain a distance education system based on cooper-
ative freedom. This article argues that such a system can be made possible
by computer conferencing and discusses its potential strengths and weaknes-
ses.
Time
Curriculum Space
Cooperative
Participants
Access Pace
Medium
Figure 1. The Hexagon of Cooperative Freedom
Freedom of time. In distance education, one must distinguish between
synchronous and asynchronous communication. In asynchronous communication,
the message is stored in the communication medium until the receivers find
it convenient to retrieve it. Synchronous communication, on the other hand,
is inflexible, but allows people to communicate in real time, as they do
face to face or on the telephone. Scheduling of synchronous communication
varies in flexibility. A telephone conversation can be initiated without
any prior schedule, but a videoconference must usually be scheduled months
in advance.
A high level of freedom allows students to communicate whenever it is
convenient for them. Students may prefer to study during the weekends,
after their children have gone to bed, during regular work hours, or
whenever they have time available. In addition, response time to a message
should be minimal.
Computer conferencing is completely independent of time. Ideally it is
available 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. It gives instantaneous access to
information whenever it is convenient for the user and there is no need to
synchronize the operation among communication partners. Many systems
provide synchronous communication, as well.
Freedom of space. The first of Keegan's major elements for defining
distance education dealt with the separation of teacher and learner. This
separation does not necessarily imply much freedom of space. Many distance
education programs, for instance those taught by videoconferencing, require
students to attend classes at fixed locations. Further, Keegan concludes
that distance education may include occasional face-to-face meetings.
Distance education programs with a high level of freedom let students
choose where they want to study. Some may want to meet in a classroom with
their peers while others prefer to study at home, at work, or wherever a
busy life situates them.
Computer conferencing can be accessed worldwide, wherever there is a
telephone. Long distance telephone charges, though a limiting factor, can
to some extent be reduced by access to data networks.
Freedom of pace. Pacing implies meeting deadlines for starting a
course, for examinations, and for assignments. Deadlines, however, can be
flexible or rigid. They are flexible when students can set the deadlines,
or select one of several deadlines. One example of extreme pacing flexibil-
ity is seen in correspondence courses that allow students to start and
finish at any time. A more moderately flexible example is a course with
multiple starting dates that allow students to enroll at a convenient time.
Shale (1987, 32) asserts that "...standardized treatments (of pacing) could
be applied to all students on an individual basis." He also suggests
possible justifications for rigid pacing:
- To make the administration of a distance-learning system tractable,
- To express a commitment to a collectivist philosophy,
- To guarantee the credibility of examinations,
- To enhance student motivation through group activity, and
- To avoid procrastination. (Shale 1987)
Based on a study of students who took the same course either by
correspondence or by computer conferencing, Rekkedal concludes that "the
correspondence students consider individual pace of study to constitute a
large advantage of correspondence studies, while the EKKO (computer
conferencing) students give more varied viewpoints" (Rekkedal 1990, 91).
A high level of freedom allows students to choose the pacing they
prefer. If they resent rigid pacing, they should be allowed to spend the
time they require to complete a course. Other people would like to choose
when to start a course and how fast to progress in it.
Wells (1992) identifies three pacing techniques available with CMC.
The first is group assignments that urge coherent pacing within groups. The
second is gating, a technique that denies students access to information
before they have completed all prerequisite assignments. The third tech-
nique is limited time access to services such as conferences, databases,
and guest speakers.
The previous discussion shows that computer conferencing courses can
be paced to a greater or lesser extent. Meaningful group communications,
perhaps computer conferencing's major advantage, may, however, be hard to
accomplish in an unpaced mode.
Freedom of medium. Nipper (1989) argues that there are three gener-
ations of distance education. The first generation uses correspondence
teaching based on printed and written material. The second is based on
broadcast media, such as television and radio, as well as on distribution
of video- and audiocassettes. The third generation uses computer conferen-
cing systems. Each generation utilizes the media devised in earlier
generations.
Programs with a high level of freedom provide students with access to
several media or sources of information: print, video, face-to-face
meetings, computer conferencing, etc. This approach will support different
learning styles and prevent exclusion of students lacking access to or
knowledge of hightechnology media. Computer conferencing can easily and
favorably be supplemented by or integrated with textbooks, audio and
videoconferences, computer-aided instruction, etc.
Freedom of access. This point is related to the terms "open learning"
and "open education." Charles A. Wedemeyer explains the origin of the term
open learning:
This term came into use in 1969 when the British Open University was
founded. It...means providing part-time learning opportunities for
learners at a distance, who operate with a degree of autonomy and
self-direction, but with open mediated access to learning without
conventional prerequisites for acceptance or accreditation. (Wedemeyer
1981, xxvi)
Escotet (cited in Keegan 1986) characterizes open education as less
restricted, exclusive, and privileged than traditional education; as
flexibly paced; as encouraging new relationships between professors and
students; and as willing to accredit the value of students' life experi-
ences.
Programs that aspire to a high level of freedom must eliminate
discrimination on the basis of social class, entry qualifications, gender,
age, ethnicity, or occupation. Programs should not ask students to document
prior education; rather, students should decide for themselves whether they
are capable of pursuing the course of study. Access should be available to
students with limited monetary resources, and to those with no access to or
limited knowledge of distance education technology. A major concern for
computer conferencing is its image as an exclusive medium closed to
prospective students lacking access to necessary equipment or knowledge
about how to use it. Fortunately, this problem is alleviated year by year
as more people learn to use computers at home, school, or work.
Freedom of curriculum. This facet reflects the theories of autonomy
and independence discussed earlier in this article. One noticeable example
of such freedom is provided by the Electronic University Network, which
promotes transfer of credits among all its member colleges.
A high level of freedom allows students to choose among a range of
courses and to transfer credits between programs and universities. It
further implies opportunities for individual studies, learning contracts,
internships, etc.
Computer conferencing has the potential to enhance inter-college
collaboration. Several programs, perhaps from different colleges, could
favorably be offered through one computer conferencing system. It is to be
hoped that such multi-program computer conferencing systems will provide
additional course options and transfer of credits.
Discussion
Freedom is a multi-dimensional construct. Each dimension should be
regarded as continuous rather than dichotomous, as relative, not absolute.
All distance education programs will have some freedom in each dimension.
There are no quick, definite, or ready-made answers to the question of how
much freedom a distance education program should provide. Nevertheless,
program planners who address this question are likely to provide better
distance education.
A high level of student freedom, assumed in this article to be a
desirable goal of course design, is extremely difficult to achieve. Scarce
resources and rigid educational regulations often inhibit flexible distance
education. Yet, the hexagon of cooperative freedom can serve as a guide for
implementation of distance education.
One may say that one person's freedom ends where another's begins,
that one person's freedom to act infringes on the freedom of another. As
Burge (1991) points out in relation to computer conferencing, "One person's
time flexibility is another's time delay." The truth of this statement is
hard to refute, but such negative consequences could be mitigated by
reducing dependence on individual students and instructors. Coteaching, for
instance, could reduce the response time since several teachers can access
the system more often than one teacher can.
Individual freedom is hard to combine with an industrialized model of
education and can hardly compete in terms of cost effectiveness with
industrialized mass education. There is a trend, however, toward customized
mass production. A buyer of a new car today may choose among several
accessory options. Why, then, should not modern mass education aim for
individual flexibility?
Conclusion
Future adult students will seek individual flexibility and freedom. At
the same time, they need group collaboration and social unity. Computer
conferencing, when integrated with other media, can be the means of joining
freedom and unity into truly flexible, cooperative distance education
programs.
References
Bates, T. 1991. Third generation distance education: The challenge of new
technology. Research in Distance Education 3(2):10-15.
Burge, E. J. 1991. Appreciation and description: Themes for germinal
research. A paper presented at The Second American Symposium on
Research in Distance Education, May 22-24, The Pennsylvania State
University, University Park, PA.
Holmberg, B. 1988. Guided didactic conversation in distance education. In
Distance Education: International Perspectives, eds. D. Sewart, D.
Keegan, and B. Holmberg, 114-22. London/New York: Croom Helm/St.
Martins Press.
Houle, C. O. 1961. The Inquiring Mind Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin
Press.
Houle, C. O. 1984. The design of education. In Selected Writings on
Philosophy and Adult Education, ed. S. B. Merriam, 41-50. Malibar,
Florida: Krieger.
Keegan, D. 1986. The Foundations of Distance Education. London: Croom Helm.
Keegan, D. 1988a. Theories of distance education. In Distance Education:
International Perspectives, eds. D. Sewart, D. Keegan, and B. Holm-
berg, 63-67. London: Routledge.
Keegan, D. 1988b. On defining distance education. In Distance Education:
International Perspectives, eds. D. Sewart, D. Keegan, and B. Holm-
berg, 6-33. London: Routledge.
Knowles, M. 1970. The Modern Practice of Adult Education. New York:
Association Press.
McCreary, E. K 1990. Three behavioral models for computer-mediated communi-
cation. In Online Education: Perspectives on a New Environment, ed. L.
Harasim, 117-30. New York: Praeger.
Mason, R. and T. Kaye. 1990. Toward a new paradigm for distance education.
In Online Education: Perspectives on a New Environment, ed. L.
Harasim, 15-38. New York: Praeger.
Moore, M. G. 1983. On a theory of independent study. In Distance Education:
International Perspectives, eds. D. Sewart, D. Keegan, and B. Holm-
berg. London/New York: Croom Helm/St. Martin's Press.
Moore, M. G. 1991. Theory of distance education. Paper presented at The
Second American Symposium on Research in Distance Education, May
22-24, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA.
Nipper, S. 1989. Third generation distance learning and computer conferen-
cing. In Mindweave: Communication, Computers and Distance Education,
eds. R. Mason and A. Kaye, 63-73. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Paulsen, M. F. 1992. From Bulletin Boards to Electronic Universities:
Distance Education, Computer-Mediated Communication, and Online
Education. University Park: The American Center for the Study of
Distance Education.
Paulsen, M. F. 1992. The electronic university: computer conferencing in
mass education. In From Bulletin Boards to Electronic Universities:
Distance Education, Computer-Mediated Communication, and Online
Education, M. F. Paulsen, 46-55. University Park: The American Center
for the Study of Distance Education.
Peters, O. 1988. Distance teaching and industrial production: A comparative
interpretation in outline. In Distance Education: International
Perspectives, eds. D. Sewart, D. Keegan, and B. Holmberg, 95-111.
London/New York: Croom Helm/St. Martin's Press.
Rekkedal, T. 1990. Recruitment and study barriers in the electronic
college. In The Electronic College. Selected Articles From the EKKO
Project, eds. M. F. Paulsen and T. Rekkedal, 79-105. Oslo: NKI
Forlaget.
Shale, D. G. 1987. Pacing in distance education. The American Journal of
Distance Education 1(2):21-33.
Wedemeyer, C. A. 1981. Learning at the Back Door. Wisconsin: The University
of Wisconsin Press.
Wells, R. 1992. Computer-Mediated Communication for Distance Education: An
International Review of Design, Teaching, and Institutional Issues.
University Park: The American Center for the Study of Distance
Education.
--------------------- End of DEOSNEWS Vol. 3 No. 2 --------------------
mp
osium" 17-JAN-1993 06:51:28.04
To: Howard Lawrence <[email protected]>
CC:
Subj: DEOSNEWS Vol. 3 No. 2
Message-id: <[email protected]>
Received: from JNET-DAEMON by PSUARCH.Bitnet; Sun, 17 Jan 93 06:50 EDT
Received: From PSUVM(MAILER) by PSUARCH with Jnet id 1427 for HRL@PSUARCH; Sun,
17 Jan 93 06:50 EDT
Received: from PSUVM.BITNET by PSUVM.PSU.EDU (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP
id 4407; Sun, 17 Jan 93 06:44:20 EST
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1993 12:36:58 +0100
From: "Morten F. Paulsen" <morten@xxxxxx>
Subject: DEOSNEWS Vol. 3 No. 2
Sender: DEOSNEWS - The Distance Education Online Symposium
<[email protected]>
To: Howard Lawrence <[email protected]>
Reply-to: DEOSNEWS - The Distance Education Online Symposium
<[email protected]>
X-To: deosnews@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
DEOSNEWS Vol. 3 No. 2. ISSN 1062-9416.
Copyright 1993 DEOS - The Distance Education Online Symposium
DEOSNEWS has 1325 subscribers in 46 countries.
This document has about 525 lines.
Published in collaboration with The American Journal of Distance Education
and The American Center for the Study of Distance Education
The Pennsylvania State University, College of Education
403 South Allen Street, Suite 206
University Park, Pennsylvania 16801-5202, U.S.A.
E-mail: MAK10@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Tel: +814-863-3764 Fax: +814-865-5878
DEOS was established with a grant from the Annenberg/CPB Project
and it is supported by NKI in Norway.
Editor: Morten Flate Paulsen, MORTEN@xxxxxx
NKI, Box 111, 1341 Bekkestua, Norway
To subscribe to DEOSNEWS and DEOS-L (a discussion forum), just post the
following commands to LISTSERV@PSUVM or LISTSERV@xxxxxxxxxxxxx:
SUBSCRIBE DEOSNEWS Your Full Name
SUBSCRIBE DEOS-L Your Full Name
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EDITORIAL
This issue of DEOSNEWS presents a computer scanned version of the final
article in my monograph "From Bulletin Boards to Electronic Universities:
Distance Education, Computer-Mediated Communication, and Online Education"
(Paulsen 1992). The article is a first attempt to develop a theory of
distance education attuned specifically to CMC. Focusing on the interplay
of independence and cooperation within the dimensions of time, space, pace,
medium, access, and curriculum within distance education contexts, it is
argued that computer conferencing can foster both freedom for the individ-
ual and group cooperation.
The Hexagon Of Cooperative Freedom:
A Distance Education Theory Attuned to Computer Conferencing
Morten Flate Paulsen
Introduction
This article presents a distance education theory based on existing
theoretical perspectives and discusses how it applies to computer confer-
encing. In an analysis of existing theories of distance education, Keegan
(1988a, 30) concluded that six major elements define a distance education
program:
- The separation of teacher and learner, which distinguishes it from
face-to-face learning;
- The influence of an educational organization, which distinguishes it
from private study;
- The use of technical media, usually print, to unite teacher and
learner and carry the educational content;
- The provision of two-way communication so that the student may benefit
from or even initiate dialogue;
- The possibility of occasional meetings for both didactic and social-
ization purposes; and
- The participation in an industrialized form of education which, if
accepted, contains the genus of radical separation of distance
education from other forms.
The implications of introducing CMC in distance education are discus-
sed for each of these elements by Mason and Kaye (1990). They conclude that
the use of CMC has three major implications for distance education:
- The breaking down of conceptual distinctions between distance educa-
tion and place-based education;
- The changing of traditional roles of faculty, administrative and
support staff, and adjunct tutors; and
- The provision of an opportunity, which never existed before, to create
a network of scholars, "space" for collective thinking, and access to
peers for socializing and serendipitous exchange.
These implications are so important that it is necessary to re-evaluate
traditional distance education theories and discuss how they attune to CMC.
Distance Education Theories
Many theoretical perspectives on distance education have been pres-
ented during the last twenty years. Keegan (1988b) identifies these three
theoretical positions:
- Theories of autonomy and independence,
- Theories of industrialization, and
- Theories of interaction and communication.
One representative theory in each position follows and the implication of
the theory for computer conferencing is discussed.
Theories of autonomy and independence. Moore's inductive analysis of
descriptions of two thousand instructional programs led to the development
of a theory on dialogue, structure, and autonomy (Moore 1991). Moore
perceives dialogue as interaction between learner and instructor, structure
as certain characteristics of course design, and autonomy as learner
independence. He argues that distance education organizations should
ideally give students maximum independence with regard to choice of aims,
objectives, study methods, and learning activities; study pace and pro-
gression; and evaluation (Moore 1983).
In a recent paper, Moore (1991) encourages analysis of the effects
computer conferencing has on dialogue, structure, and autonomy. First, the
introduction of group communication means that dialogue is no longer mere
communication between learner and instructor. Second, few courses have been
designed for computer conferencing; the majority have adapted their
structure from existing distance education courses or face-to-face courses.
Third, computer conferencing is devised for group activity, so too much
autonomy is not within its scope. However, the goal must be to devise
systems that support individual freedom as well as cooperative group
activity.
Theories of industrialization. Peters's (1988) applications of
industrial theory led him to conclude that the structure of distance
teaching is determined to a considerable degree by the principles of
industrialization, particularly by those of rationalization, division of
labor, and mass production; the teaching process is gradually restructured
through increasing mechanization and mass production. These changes account
for the emergence of the following structural propositions:
- The development of distance study courses is just as important as the
preparatory work taking place prior to the production process.
- The effectiveness of the teaching process is particularly dependent on
planning and organization.
- Courses must be formalized and expectations from students standard-
ized.
- The teaching process is largely objectified.
- The functions of academics teaching at a distance have changed
considerably vis-a-vis university teachers in conventional teaching.
- Distance study can only be economical with a concentration of the
available resources and a centralized administration. (Peters 1988,-
110)
At first sight, the theory of industrialization does not seem to apply
to computer conferencing. Bates (1991) states:
Third generation technologies (computer conferencing) are particularly
valuable where relatively small numbers of students are concerned,
since they avoid the high fixed production costs of the industrial
model, but they do not however bring the economies of scale of the
industrial model, unless the opportunities for interaction for an
individual student are dramatically curtailed. (p. 13)
So far, we have very limited knowledge about how computer conferencing
can be applied to mass education. We know, however, that computer conferen-
cing systems can handle thousands of users. Hence, in a discussion of
future electronic universities, this author describes how computer confer-
encing systems can be designed to support mass education (Paulsen 1992,
46).
Theories of interaction and communication. In his theory of guided
didactic conversation, Holmberg (1988) views the distance-study course and
its non-contiguous communication style as instruments of a "conversation-
like interaction between the student on the one hand and the tutor counsel-
lor of the supporting organization administering the study on the other"
(p. 115). Constant interaction (conversation) between the supporting
organization (authors, tutors, counselors) is both simulated and real:
simulated through the students' interaction with the pre-produced course
materials and real through written and/or telephone interaction with their
tutors and counselors.
Holmberg's theory is developed with a focus on correspondence courses
and one-to-one communication. Consequently, it does not give much consider-
ation to group communication. However, the theory can be developed further
to include group facilitation, and a number of authors have recommended
related facilitation techniques for computer conference courses.
To date, very little pre-produced course material is developed just
for computer conferencing. Most of the material is adapted directly from
existing face-to-face or correspondence courses. More work must be done in
the future to produce tailor-made material for computer conferencing
courses. An important feature of such material would be the potential for
asynchronous group interaction. On the other hand, experience has shown
that computer conferencing as currently implemented can be an excellent
medium for facilitating a guided didactic conversation between the stu-
dents, the tutors, and the supporting organization.
The Theory of Cooperative Freedom
The theory of cooperative freedom can be classified as a theory of
autonomy and independence, as described earlier in this article. It is
influenced by Knowles's (1970) theory of andragogy, which asserts that
adult learners perceive themselves as self-directing human beings and
define themselves in terms of their personal achievements and experiences.
The theory of cooperative freedom perceives both adult and juvenile
distance learners as motivated, self-directing students with a desire to
control their learning outcomes. Further, the theory applies to all three
categories of Houle's (1961) student motivational orientations: goal
oriented, activity oriented, and learning oriented.
McCreary (1990, 120) indicates how each of Houle's categories will
relate to computer conferencing systems. Goal-oriented participants will
perceive CMC as a way to "keep the edge" and to use state-of-the-art
technology to achieve their goals. Activity-oriented students cannot resist
the always-available online activity. Finally, knowledge-oriented people
may be motivated by access to all the up-to-date information and knowledge-
able people that CMC provides.
The theory of cooperative freedom suggests that, independent of
motivational orientation, distance students need cooperation as well as
freedom.
Cooperation. Houle (1984) states that education is a cooperative
rather than an operative art: it implies voluntary interaction among
individuals during learning. Even solitary students guiding their own
programs without the help of an instructor seek help and encouragement from
others. In a social setting, those who take part in an educational activity
should have some sense of collaboration in both planning and implementa-
tion:
At one extreme, this sharing is so complete that it requires a group
to decide everything that it does together. At the other extreme, the
sharing may be implicit in the teaching-learning situation, as when
many people flock to hear a lecturer. Those who attend vote with their
feet, as the saying goes, and one cannot assume from their physical
passivity and silence as they sit in the auditorium that they are not
cooperating fully in their instruction. (Houle 1984, 45)
Cooperation can be hard to achieve in distance education. A major
problem for many students is the loneliness that results from limited
access to student peers; the urge for individual freedom may intensify the
problem. However, new group communication technologies such as audio
conferencing, video conferencing, and computer conferencing have been
devised to facilitate cooperation at a distance.
Freedom. The theory of cooperative freedom is concerned with freedom
from restraints rather than freedom from oppression. It professes that
students should have a high level of freedom to choose rather than be
restrained by a rigid distance education program. It states that freedom is
crucial in distance education. For many people, the need for continuing
education and lifelong learning is increasing. Today's students, however,
often have full-time jobs and families to take care of and many are
reluctant to participate if it means relinquishing high-quality family life
and job achievements. They need flexible education: education that allows
them to combine job, family, and education in a manageable way.
Freedom is a complex construct. It has many facets and features. The
theory of cooperative freedom suggests that the facets of special import-
ance to distance education are time, space, pace, medium, access, and
curriculum. None of these can be described as dichotomous; each must be
perceived as a continuum. This article describes important features of
these six facets of freedom that program planners should consider when they
develop distance education programs based on computer conferencing. The
facets are presented and discussed as the Hexagon of Cooperative Freedom
(Figure 1).
Cooperative freedom is a fabricated term. At first sight, it seems
self-contradictory. "Cooperative" indicates group interaction, though
"freedom" implies individual autonomy. Yet, if we could develop a distance
education system that combines freedom for the individual with group
cooperation, we would attain a distance education system based on cooper-
ative freedom. This article argues that such a system can be made possible
by computer conferencing and discusses its potential strengths and weaknes-
ses.
Time
Curriculum Space
Cooperative
Participants
Access Pace
Medium
Figure 1. The Hexagon of Cooperative Freedom
Freedom of time. In distance education, one must distinguish between
synchronous and asynchronous communication. In asynchronous communication,
the message is stored in the communication medium until the receivers find
it convenient to retrieve it. Synchronous communication, on the other hand,
is inflexible, but allows people to communicate in real time, as they do
face to face or on the telephone. Scheduling of synchronous communication
varies in flexibility. A telephone conversation can be initiated without
any prior schedule, but a videoconference must usually be scheduled months
in advance.
A high level of freedom allows students to communicate whenever it is
convenient for them. Students may prefer to study during the weekends,
after their children have gone to bed, during regular work hours, or
whenever they have time available. In addition, response time to a message
should be minimal.
Computer conferencing is completely independent of time. Ideally it is
available 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. It gives instantaneous access to
information whenever it is convenient for the user and there is no need to
synchronize the operation among communication partners. Many systems
provide synchronous communication, as well.
Freedom of space. The first of Keegan's major elements for defining
distance education dealt with the separation of teacher and learner. This
separation does not necessarily imply much freedom of space. Many distance
education programs, for instance those taught by videoconferencing, require
students to attend classes at fixed locations. Further, Keegan concludes
that distance education may include occasional face-to-face meetings.
Distance education programs with a high level of freedom let students
choose where they want to study. Some may want to meet in a classroom with
their peers while others prefer to study at home, at work, or wherever a
busy life situates them.
Computer conferencing can be accessed worldwide, wherever there is a
telephone. Long distance telephone charges, though a limiting factor, can
to some extent be reduced by access to data networks.
Freedom of pace. Pacing implies meeting deadlines for starting a
course, for examinations, and for assignments. Deadlines, however, can be
flexible or rigid. They are flexible when students can set the deadlines,
or select one of several deadlines. One example of extreme pacing flexibil-
ity is seen in correspondence courses that allow students to start and
finish at any time. A more moderately flexible example is a course with
multiple starting dates that allow students to enroll at a convenient time.
Shale (1987, 32) asserts that "...standardized treatments (of pacing) could
be applied to all students on an individual basis." He also suggests
possible justifications for rigid pacing:
- To make the administration of a distance-learning system tractable,
- To express a commitment to a collectivist philosophy,
- To guarantee the credibility of examinations,
- To enhance student motivation through group activity, and
- To avoid procrastination. (Shale 1987)
Based on a study of students who took the same course either by
correspondence or by computer conferencing, Rekkedal concludes that "the
correspondence students consider individual pace of study to constitute a
large advantage of correspondence studies, while the EKKO (computer
conferencing) students give more varied viewpoints" (Rekkedal 1990, 91).
A high level of freedom allows students to choose the pacing they
prefer. If they resent rigid pacing, they should be allowed to spend the
time they require to complete a course. Other people would like to choose
when to start a course and how fast to progress in it.
Wells (1992) identifies three pacing techniques available with CMC.
The first is group assignments that urge coherent pacing within groups. The
second is gating, a technique that denies students access to information
before they have completed all prerequisite assignments. The third tech-
nique is limited time access to services such as conferences, databases,
and guest speakers.
The previous discussion shows that computer conferencing courses can
be paced to a greater or lesser extent. Meaningful group communications,
perhaps computer conferencing's major advantage, may, however, be hard to
accomplish in an unpaced mode.
Freedom of medium. Nipper (1989) argues that there are three gener-
ations of distance education. The first generation uses correspondence
teaching based on printed and written material. The second is based on
broadcast media, such as television and radio, as well as on distribution
of video- and audiocassettes. The third generation uses computer conferen-
cing systems. Each generation utilizes the media devised in earlier
generations.
Programs with a high level of freedom provide students with access to
several media or sources of information: print, video, face-to-face
meetings, computer conferencing, etc. This approach will support different
learning styles and prevent exclusion of students lacking access to or
knowledge of hightechnology media. Computer conferencing can easily and
favorably be supplemented by or integrated with textbooks, audio and
videoconferences, computer-aided instruction, etc.
Freedom of access. This point is related to the terms "open learning"
and "open education." Charles A. Wedemeyer explains the origin of the term
open learning:
This term came into use in 1969 when the British Open University was
founded. It...means providing part-time learning opportunities for
learners at a distance, who operate with a degree of autonomy and
self-direction, but with open mediated access to learning without
conventional prerequisites for acceptance or accreditation. (Wedemeyer
1981, xxvi)
Escotet (cited in Keegan 1986) characterizes open education as less
restricted, exclusive, and privileged than traditional education; as
flexibly paced; as encouraging new relationships between professors and
students; and as willing to accredit the value of students' life experi-
ences.
Programs that aspire to a high level of freedom must eliminate
discrimination on the basis of social class, entry qualifications, gender,
age, ethnicity, or occupation. Programs should not ask students to document
prior education; rather, students should decide for themselves whether they
are capable of pursuing the course of study. Access should be available to
students with limited monetary resources, and to those with no access to or
limited knowledge of distance education technology. A major concern for
computer conferencing is its image as an exclusive medium closed to
prospective students lacking access to necessary equipment or knowledge
about how to use it. Fortunately, this problem is alleviated year by year
as more people learn to use computers at home, school, or work.
Freedom of curriculum. This facet reflects the theories of autonomy
and independence discussed earlier in this article. One noticeable example
of such freedom is provided by the Electronic University Network, which
promotes transfer of credits among all its member colleges.
A high level of freedom allows students to choose among a range of
courses and to transfer credits between programs and universities. It
further implies opportunities for individual studies, learning contracts,
internships, etc.
Computer conferencing has the potential to enhance inter-college
collaboration. Several programs, perhaps from different colleges, could
favorably be offered through one computer conferencing system. It is to be
hoped that such multi-program computer conferencing systems will provide
additional course options and transfer of credits.
Discussion
Freedom is a multi-dimensional construct. Each dimension should be
regarded as continuous rather than dichotomous, as relative, not absolute.
All distance education programs will have some freedom in each dimension.
There are no quick, definite, or ready-made answers to the question of how
much freedom a distance education program should provide. Nevertheless,
program planners who address this question are likely to provide better
distance education.
A high level of student freedom, assumed in this article to be a
desirable goal of course design, is extremely difficult to achieve. Scarce
resources and rigid educational regulations often inhibit flexible distance
education. Yet, the hexagon of cooperative freedom can serve as a guide for
implementation of distance education.
One may say that one person's freedom ends where another's begins,
that one person's freedom to act infringes on the freedom of another. As
Burge (1991) points out in relation to computer conferencing, "One person's
time flexibility is another's time delay." The truth of this statement is
hard to refute, but such negative consequences could be mitigated by
reducing dependence on individual students and instructors. Coteaching, for
instance, could reduce the response time since several teachers can access
the system more often than one teacher can.
Individual freedom is hard to combine with an industrialized model of
education and can hardly compete in terms of cost effectiveness with
industrialized mass education. There is a trend, however, toward customized
mass production. A buyer of a new car today may choose among several
accessory options. Why, then, should not modern mass education aim for
individual flexibility?
Conclusion
Future adult students will seek individual flexibility and freedom. At
the same time, they need group collaboration and social unity. Computer
conferencing, when integrated with other media, can be the means of joining
freedom and unity into truly flexible, cooperative distance education
programs.
References
Bates, T. 1991. Third generation distance education: The challenge of new
technology. Research in Distance Education 3(2):10-15.
Burge, E. J. 1991. Appreciation and description: Themes for germinal
research. A paper presented at The Second American Symposium on
Research in Distance Education, May 22-24, The Pennsylvania State
University, University Park, PA.
Holmberg, B. 1988. Guided didactic conversation in distance education. In
Distance Education: International Perspectives, eds. D. Sewart, D.
Keegan, and B. Holmberg, 114-22. London/New York: Croom Helm/St.
Martins Press.
Houle, C. O. 1961. The Inquiring Mind Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin
Press.
Houle, C. O. 1984. The design of education. In Selected Writings on
Philosophy and Adult Education, ed. S. B. Merriam, 41-50. Malibar,
Florida: Krieger.
Keegan, D. 1986. The Foundations of Distance Education. London: Croom Helm.
Keegan, D. 1988a. Theories of distance education. In Distance Education:
International Perspectives, eds. D. Sewart, D. Keegan, and B. Holm-
berg, 63-67. London: Routledge.
Keegan, D. 1988b. On defining distance education. In Distance Education:
International Perspectives, eds. D. Sewart, D. Keegan, and B. Holm-
berg, 6-33. London: Routledge.
Knowles, M. 1970. The Modern Practice of Adult Education. New York:
Association Press.
McCreary, E. K 1990. Three behavioral models for computer-mediated communi-
cation. In Online Education: Perspectives on a New Environment, ed. L.
Harasim, 117-30. New York: Praeger.
Mason, R. and T. Kaye. 1990. Toward a new paradigm for distance education.
In Online Education: Perspectives on a New Environment, ed. L.
Harasim, 15-38. New York: Praeger.
Moore, M. G. 1983. On a theory of independent study. In Distance Education:
International Perspectives, eds. D. Sewart, D. Keegan, and B. Holm-
berg. London/New York: Croom Helm/St. Martin's Press.
Moore, M. G. 1991. Theory of distance education. Paper presented at The
Second American Symposium on Research in Distance Education, May
22-24, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA.
Nipper, S. 1989. Third generation distance learning and computer conferen-
cing. In Mindweave: Communication, Computers and Distance Education,
eds. R. Mason and A. Kaye, 63-73. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Paulsen, M. F. 1992. From Bulletin Boards to Electronic Universities:
Distance Education, Computer-Mediated Communication, and Online
Education. University Park: The American Center for the Study of
Distance Education.
Paulsen, M. F. 1992. The electronic university: computer conferencing in
mass education. In From Bulletin Boards to Electronic Universities:
Distance Education, Computer-Mediated Communication, and Online
Education, M. F. Paulsen, 46-55. University Park: The American Center
for the Study of Distance Education.
Peters, O. 1988. Distance teaching and industrial production: A comparative
interpretation in outline. In Distance Education: International
Perspectives, eds. D. Sewart, D. Keegan, and B. Holmberg, 95-111.
London/New York: Croom Helm/St. Martin's Press.
Rekkedal, T. 1990. Recruitment and study barriers in the electronic
college. In The Electronic College. Selected Articles From the EKKO
Project, eds. M. F. Paulsen and T. Rekkedal, 79-105. Oslo: NKI
Forlaget.
Shale, D. G. 1987. Pacing in distance education. The American Journal of
Distance Education 1(2):21-33.
Wedemeyer, C. A. 1981. Learning at the Back Door. Wisconsin: The University
of Wisconsin Press.
Wells, R. 1992. Computer-Mediated Communication for Distance Education: An
International Review of Design, Teaching, and Institutional Issues.
University Park: The American Center for the Study of Distance
Education.
--------------------- End of DEOSNEWS Vol. 3 No. 2 --------------------