Keywords

Introduction

Open, distance, and digital education (ODDE) refers to a distance education model that is based on and delivered using digital technologies. Distance education (DE) itself has been evolving through several generations starting from the era of correspondence study to the latest one known as online education. Following the correspondence model, Taylor (2001) categorized DE generations into five which correlate to the type of dominant technologies being used to deliver the education: (1) the correspondence model, (2) the multimedia model, (3) the tele-learning model, (4) the flexible learning model, and (5) the intelligent flexible learning model. The last two generations were born as the result of Internet technology, and therefore DE models can easily be viewed as those in the pre-Internet era (conventional DE) and the post-Internet era (online DE). It is in Taylor’s fourth generation that terms such as e-learning, mobile learning, ubiquitous learning, virtual learning, and ODDE were born and, to some extent, are being used interchangeably. With the vast use of online technology, the DE generation continues to be related to connectivism, which assumes that learning occurs within an interrelated network of data and information, best exemplified by the connective massive open online courses (cMOOCs) model. According to Siemens (2013), cMOOCs are based on a connectivist pedagogical model that views knowledge as “a networked state and learning as the process of generating those networks and adding and pruning connections” (p. 8). Thus, learning happens within a digital network, where learners use various digital platforms (e.g., blogs, wikis, social media platforms) to make their own connections with learning resources including content and learning communities to create and construct knowledge.

The aforementioned categorization of DE generations demonstrates that each generation needs its own infrastructures, support systems, and quality standards to ensure the learning and teaching process’s effectiveness. Pre-Internet DE infrastructure was dominated by physical buildings and facilities for management offices and learning support systems; printed materials, multimedia, and radio/television broadcast as teaching media; and quality was correlated with media effectiveness in delivering learning content when compared to traditional face-to-face teaching. In the post-Internet DE, infrastructure is significantly replaced by information and communication technologies (ICTs) both for administration and the teaching and learning process, making the entire process virtual and, theoretically, globally connected. As a result, quality in the Internet DE encompasses concerns about issues such as digital learning environment, learning engagement, and learning achievement, among other things.

The Organization of Section 5

Because infrastructure is so vital, it is important to keep track of how it evolves over time to better anticipate future development requirements. Several organizational/institutional infrastructures, including learner support systems, faculty support systems, administrative support systems, program, and course evaluation, and information and library services, appear to be essential to DE practices, regardless of which generation they belong to. As part of the institutional infrastructure, quality assurance (QA) appears to be a cross-generational necessity. This section focuses on the infrastructure features and issues as interpreted by selected authors who are well-known in the field and have gained experience in the relevant subjects. The authors come from a variety of countries and areas, including Asia, Europe, Africa, and North America.

To open the section on Infrastructure, Quality Assurance, and Support Systems of ODDE, this chapter will discuss some trends and debates about the nature of institutional infrastructure before and after the Internet era, a cross-generational supporting infrastructure related to quality assurance, as well as learning resources particularly those related to the open educational resources (OER) and open licenses, and some thoughts on the metaverse as an emerging trend in education.

Institutional Infrastructures in the Pre- and Post-Internet Era

Infrastructure for Course Materials Development and Student Support Services

In its simplest form, DE management in the pre-Internet era consists of two main elements of activities: course materials development [and delivery] and student support services (Mcdougall & Apan, 2003). It is those two main elements that make the pre-Internet distance education usually requires substantial initial capital investment for producing and delivering the print-based course materials and for providing face-to-face and in-person support services, as well as for administering pencil-paper student assessment.

The best illustration of the pre-Internet DE is undoubtedly the distance teaching university (DTU) model, which includes the open university paradigm. The DTU’s early teaching strategy consisted of pre-written course materials that are heavily tailored for print, complemented by multimedia resources, broadcast television, and radio programs, as well as in-person tutoring in study centers. Students at DTUs, including those with special needs, were expected to study independently using the course materials, complete the assignments, as well as participate in (optional) in-person tutorials and pass the exam anywhere. A chapter co-authored by Kocdar and Bozkurt emphasizes that ODDE is inclusive by nature and should envision equity, equality, and justice for all learners, including those who have special needs; thus, DTUs should use student support service strategies that can assist students with special needs in overcoming their challenges. To deliver these services, DTUs usually establish service centers, often referred to as regional offices, learning centers, etc., in their regional serving areas. As a result, it is customary for a DTU to have a vast physical network of facilities for its operations.

Because of the availability of ICTs and the Internet, course materials development and delivery no longer necessitate large-scale production facilities, as they can now be done electronically through the Internet. Similarly, online platforms are gradually being used to conduct and provide learning assessments and support services for students. These modifications eliminated the need for large physical facilities and networks, lowering the number of study centers required. Physical study centers at DTUs in the Internet era have changed their functions to become more promotional and symbolic of physical presence.

The evolution of ODDE’s institutional infrastructure is an inevitable result of the growth and advancement of ICT. To sustainably ensure and improve the quality of its services, DTUs must be able to modify their infrastructures in line with emerging ICTs. Benke and Widger’s chapter in this section further examines how the ability to dynamically develop services can be instilled within the institutional infrastructure for ODDE. It examines parts of the field’s evolution, including the development of structures that support scalability, affordability, and sustainability. It also presents an overview of institutional infrastructure and models for ODDE, followed by a review of the evolving delivery strategies, institutional infrastructure, and the demand for IT infrastructure support.

Technological Infrastructure

DTUs have always had a strong technological infrastructure, as seen by their vast physical hardware, which included mainframes in specialized computer facilities/buildings and personal PCs as working stations. DTUs’ massification of DE necessitates a strong technology-based academic administration system, such as a comprehensive student record system, which has become the backbone of all operations and learning support services. The student record system keeps track of data that is manually entered from completed printed papers.

When the Internet became available for general usage, the Flexible Learning Model promises to combine the advantages of high-quality multimedia with increased engagement. The social contact between students and teachers as well as each student’s interaction with teaching-learning resources has been enhanced by the Internet (Bates, 1995). This has highlighted the notable distinction between learning through DE before and following Internet use. According to Tait (2000), the ICTs revolution was the advancement of open and distance learning from “print at the core of a range of media” to virtual environments delivered via the Web. Internet use in ODDE has an enormous influence on the infrastructure needed to facilitate both the provision and the process of learning. With the change in the way students access the course materials and interact with both the instructors and other students, the need for massive physical infrastructure was dramatically decreasing. All functions that need physical buildings and room in an older ODDE practice can now be conducted with and by a computing system. Computer mainframes that used to be the physical storage of data have now also been replaced by cloud computing. Practically, the ODDE infrastructure in the Internet era is dominated by computer databases, platforms, and applications within a digital learning environment (DLE).

The infrastructure required to support both the delivery of and the process of learning is significantly impacted by Internet use in ODDE. The demand for extensive physical infrastructure was severely declining because of the change in how students access the course materials and communicate with both the teachers and other students. According to Panda’s chapter, as globalization, technology, and perceptions of twenty-first-century learners and learning change, DTUs also gradually alter their delivery methods and learner support systems: from course design and learner support being separate to both being an integral part of blended teaching-learning; from a more physically and geographically based operation to a more technologically enabled networked operation; from behaviorist to more of constructivist and connectivist models of course design and learner support; and from a humanistic support system to more of strategic support system. Almost all operations that required physical structures and space in an older ODDE practice can now be carried out with and by a computing system. Cloud computing has now replaced computer mainframes, which were formerly the physical storage of data. Practically, computer databases, platforms, and applications within a digital learning environment (DLE) make up most of the ODDE infrastructure in the Internet era.

In 2005, Anderson created a framework to assist institutions in creating online learning (at the time known as e-learning) systems. He emphasized that quality online learning should be built within the secure fulfillment of five elements: (1) information technology (IT) infrastructure, (2) technical standards, (3) content characteristics, (4) pedagogical design, and (5) institutional management. Davis, Little, and Stewart (2011) further highlighted that quality online learning should be deployed using a learning management system (LMS) that delivers course content and resources as well as the strategies/pedagogies of the teaching and learning. Students may access their courses and all other learning resources and services with a single login owing to a user-friendly portal system that connects them to the LMS and related support services. This shows that a learning experience platform, such as an LMS, is important to online learning and is regarded as such. The LMS is where students interact with the learning materials, with teachers and tutors, and with other students. For ODDE providers, the LMS metadata may be used as important learning analytics to increase student success. Over the past 10 years, learning analytics has grown to be a crucial component of the ODDE architecture. ODDE providers can gain a better understanding of student behaviors and their connections to learning success based on the digital data (of learning activities) captured within the LMS, students’ background information in the university database, and the use of computational analysis techniques from data science and artificial intelligence.

In more recent years, the online learning system has further evolved and become a digital learning ecosystem (DLE), which is an online setting that makes use of a system’s technical affordances to improve instructional experiences. DLE promotes improvements in resource sharing and collaboration, student retention, and the standardization and reduction of the supporting infrastructure (Brown, Dehoney, & Millichap, 2015). In other words, DLE functions similarly to how ODDE functioned before the Internet by serving as a virtual representation of the whole online education infrastructure. It is an ecosystem for universities in a digital form that is increasingly cloud-based. This, however, does not eliminate the physical infrastructure as most ODDE institutions still maintain their physical basic offices for management and computing center purposes.

Cross-Generational Infrastructures: Library Services and Quality Assurance

Several parts of institutional infrastructure, such as library service and quality assurance, have been crucial to the creation and implementation of DE and ODDE systems and practices across time, whether before or after the Internet entered the picture.

Library Service and Digital Library

For any university, the library has long served as the main hub of educational resources. In reality, the library building would be the most recognizable structure on every campus in the world. A library service would include book loans, interlibrary loans, as well as reading areas. The name “library” creates the illusion of bookshelves. Except for the “physical” component, a digital library is very similar to a standard conventional library. A digital library is more than just a digitized collection with information management tools, and it involves several activities that “bring together collections, services, and people in support of the full life cycle of creation, dissemination, use, and presentation of data, information, and knowledge.” (Sun & Yuan, 2012, p. 13).

Since DE students are required to conduct independent study, the importance of digital libraries in ODDE cannot be overstated. DE providers typically provide supplemental materials using a digital platform, even in a more traditional DE where learning does not take place in the digital platform and is instead supplied through a pre-produced learning materials package. The digital library is typically one of the first electronic services created as part of learning support services as the use of ICT increases. All students should be able to access the educational materials in the digital library collections using a variety of technological tools. Consequently, a digital library comprises a web interface in addition to being a computer-based system for collecting, organizing, searching, and distributing digital items for end-user access. According to Sun and Yuan (2012), the digital library should offer quick and effective access to the materials with a variety of access modes, because it is intended to serve a specific community or collection of communities. A chapter in this section co-authored by Owusu-Ansah and Rodrigues further discusses that a collaboratively implemented digital library service will significantly improve distance learning library services by considering the importance of collaboration in strategic planning and policy development, the provision of digital collections and information services, and the development of technological infrastructure and skill sets in the context of distance education. The chapter suggests that adopting a collaborative model of digital libraries in ODDE can guarantee wider acceptance and utilization in ODDE.

Quality Assurance

Government officials, institutional administrators, academic personnel, and students all have various ideas about what quality in DE means (Jung, Wong, Li, Baigaltugs, & Belawati, 2011). Therefore, to decide on the quality criteria and standards by which to evaluate the quality of input, process, and output of DE, quality assurance activities often strive to consider all those diverse perspectives (Jung et al., 2011). Quality assurance (QA) has always been a crucial component of every ODDE system, despite the various ways that stakeholders define quality. Among ODDE practitioners, QA has long been a topic of conversation. Partly, it is due to the dynamic nature of the QA system to accord to the always-changing practices of ODDE. To capture the dynamics of the QA system, we present five chapters related to QA in this section.

As discussed in Jung’s chapter, QA in DE and ODDE has been the subject of numerous national, regional, and international initiatives throughout the years. These endeavors lead to the creation of numerous so-called quality assurance standards, guidelines, and statements of best practices (Jung et al., 2011). Although those guidelines and standards may have different styles and elements, they address several fundamental QA areas that remain constant throughout time. For instance, the QA framework for the Asian Association of Open Universities (https://www.aaou.org/quality-assurance-framework/) lists policy and planning, internal management, learners and learners’ profiles, infrastructure, media, and learning resources, learner assessment and evaluation, research and community services, human resources, learner support, program design and curriculum development, and course design and development as areas of internal quality assurance. Similarly, the European Association for Quality Assurance in Higher Education (ENQA) states that institutional policies for e-learning shall include institutional support, course development, teaching and learning, course structure, student support, faculty support with compulsory e-learning training for new members of staff, technological infrastructures, student assessment, and certification, as well as electronic security measures (Huertas et al., 2018). A chapter co-written by Ubachs and Henderikx focuses on the latest development of a QA framework for European DTUs that aligns with the Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European Higher Education Area (ESG). Ubachs and Henderikx report that due to the growing importance of e-learning, the European Association of Distance Teaching Universities (EADTU), the ENQA, and leading universities in Europe have collaboratively developed specific guidelines that operationalize the most relevant ESG standards for application in digital education including a third version of the E-xcellence manual and instrument for blended and distance learning. In addition, a more recent publication from the International Council for Open, Distance Education – ICDE reported that an effective QA and quality enhancement appears to be multifaceted, dynamic, mainstreamed, representative, and multifunctional (Ossiannilsson, Williams, Camilleri, & Brown, 2015).

Specifically for open universities (OUs), Jung (2005) identified that although some institutions put different emphasis on different QA areas, core areas of QA across the mega universities were in the course and program development and delivery. Chapter 45, “Program and Course Evaluation in Open, Distance, and Digital Education,” by Bandalaria specifically discusses how quality in ODDE has been and is expressed concerning curriculum and courses and how they are evaluated for quality to identify any gaps that need to be filled to help eliminate that notion of inferior quality. According to Bandalaria, program and course evaluation methodologies can lead to innovations and improvements if they are guided by QA Frameworks and take advantage of the data that technology can produce, as in the case of learning analytics, which served as the foundation for the suggestions made. To illustrate the implementation of QA frameworks, a chapter co-authored by Darojat and LI examines how QA programs are developed and continuously conducted at two mega universities, Universitas Terbuka and the Open University of China. Both institutions constantly develop QA systems and use systematic QA programs, which over time have improved the quality of learning. A different Chap. 47, “Accreditation and Recognition of Prior Learning in Higher Education,” by Conrad focuses on how recognition of prior learning (RPL) may and does play a significant part in the certification of higher institutional learning, which is advantageous for students, employers, and society. Conrad asserts that by acknowledging and respecting a variety of learning possibilities, RPL helps to mitigate concerns of quality in terms of fairness, diversity, and inclusion in education.

In summary, QA has been an important element of ODDE infrastructure to continuously improve services and ensure student success. More than ever, QA has taken the lead role in ensuring that educational emphasis is placed on both learning outcomes and high-quality teaching and learning. Additionally, the significance of employing QA to improve inclusivity, equity, and lifelong learning has been emphasized by the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (Martin & Stamenka, 2021).

The Sharing Paradigm: Open Educational Resources and Creative Commons

One of the greatest impacts of the global open movement in education is the birth and development of various “open” and “open-source” products that are freely available to be used by educational institutions. Because everyone may publish and share content on the second generation of the Internet, a new paradigm of sharing and sharing culture has emerged (Wiley, 2011). As a result, not only were numerous informational and instructional resources created but the entire openness phenomenon was also developed and fostered. Open education, which was previously understood to mean accessible to everyone, everywhere, at any time, has been further defined as unrestricted access to knowledge. The idea of openness has been elevated to a whole new level by the definition of open content as having the freedom to 5R: retain, revise, remix, reuse, and redistribute (Wiley, 2014).

The open content movement was also made popular when the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) opened up all its lecture materials and made them available to the public in 2001. It further gained momentum when UNESCO introduced the term OER in 2002. Many educators, policymakers, and governments are drawn to open education. At about the same time, a group of US lawyers created the Creative Commons (CC) open license framework, which makes it easier for creators to share their knowledge and information by allowing them to select the rights they want to provide to users. In many institutions and nations, the use of this CC scheme is now required for the practice of ODDE. ODDE now has a new set of infrastructures that are built on the sharing of educational resources attributable to the open movement. As this is a process of cultural transformation, Teixeira underlines in one of the chapters in this section that DTUs should work to create an open ecosystem by encouraging the usage, reuse, and remixing of OERs and guaranteeing universal accessibility and digital inclusion.

The open-source movement has altered the way educational resources are created and delivered. The sharing paradigm has had a big impact on ODDE’s infrastructure since distance education universities may now take benefit of a variety of learning resources without having to produce everything from start or constantly deal with publication concerns. As a result, they are no longer required to have their production and distribution facilities, which frees up space in their budget to address other urgent demands. Nevertheless, the widespread acceptance, usage, sharing, and future development of OER in the practice of teaching and learning in ODDE are frequently perceived as being hindered by the lack of openness on the quality of OER. A chapter authored by Zawacki-Richter, Muskens, and Marin gives an overview of OER quality assurance mechanisms from a global viewpoint and faculty members’ assessments, both of which are in line with the UNESCO Recommendation on OER. Then, based on an empirical investigation, the Instrument for Quality Assurance of OER, a quality framework, and validated instrument, is offered for the evaluation and quality assessment of OER (IQOER). The chapter further examines how such an instrument might be incorporated into a quality assurance procedure that considers the various objectives, obligations, and responsibilities of the participating stakeholders. It becomes obvious that for OER to be accepted more widely, a culture shift toward open educational practices (OEP) is also required.

The Future: Metaverse-Based ODDE

A metaverse is the convergence of virtually enhanced physical reality and physically persistent virtual space (Collins, 2008), a 3D network that forms virtual worlds that focuses on social connection (Newton, 2021). Virtual worlds can be used for everything from corporate communication and planning meetings to offering a platform for instructors, staff, and students to engage in a safe and secure environment, delivering student services on a virtual campus. This type of immersive learning is not totally new. In 2005–2006, a company named Linden Labs created “Second Life,” a technology that allowed universities to create a virtual environment (Schroeder, 2021). Although it is still theoretically operational, it did not take off beyond its experimental stage, and it may now perhaps find a “second life” in the growing metaverse (Drozdowski, 2022).

If used appropriately, the metaverse is an immersive environment that can, in theory, bring the best digital technologies to bear on education (Hirsh-Pasek et al., 2022). The best educational metaverse applications can help develop engaging and immersive learning environments for students in various educational institutions (Howell, 2022). Flashy and exciting digital experiences can be transformed into ones that are instructive with genuine social interaction at their center by learning how to use active, engaging, meaningful, socially interactive, iterative, and joyful environments to support learning goals. As an illustration, Barry, Kanematsu, and Fukumura (2010) experimented with using metaverse to deliver a problem-based learning scenario and discovered that by catering to the variety of learning styles, metaverse learning might make up for the loss of socialization in e-learning. It appears that the “real-life” learning experiences that many people feel are absent in conventional online learning systems, such as LMS, can be provided by metaverse-based online learning. Students, instructors, and staff at the University of Miami use immersive technology to connect in a network of virtual worlds to explore innovative approaches to solve problems and enhance education after 4 years of research (Tannen, 2022).

The metaverse will certainly grow much quicker, along with its myriad problems that are currently unclear and mostly unregulated, as the COVID-19 pandemic has increased the use of online learning approaches in all types of educational practice. Therefore, it is essential to use a cautious application strategy. Kye, Han, Kim, Park, and Jo (2021) stress the importance of taking the required precautions to protect student data privacy and safety when creating an educational metaverse platform. Additionally, to use the metaverse for education, instructional designers and teachers must first comprehend the technical peculiarities of each form of the metaverse and then create lessons that enable students to cooperate to solve issues or accomplish tasks.

Although the ideal metaverse for education has not yet arrived, we already know that DE has altered the way we view higher education and that the metaverse’s existence will have a similar impact. While it cannot replace traveling to campus in the real world, attending university in the metaverse alongside other “avatar” students and professors may enhance the authenticity of the experience. As the “great unbundling” of higher education accelerates due to the move to the metaverse, students may increasingly prefer only that core teaching and learning product, forgoing more traditional university requirements like dorm living, campus dining, library carrels, football games, and playing on a verdant quad (Drozdowski, 2022). Therefore, the infrastructure of the metaverse would resemble that of a standard physical campus, transforming not only ODDE but also conventional in-person teaching methods. As a result, a strong DLE furnished with cutting-edge AI, ER, XR technologies, and educational products (learning materials, laboratory experiments, etc.) would significantly replace the necessary educational infrastructure. Organizationally, the structure would also require modification from a workforce that was heavily weighted with management to one that was more computer-savvy.

Conclusion

ODDE has come a long way from the correspondence model to the latest one that is based on and delivered through an online platform. The characteristics of ODDE over time have impacted the need for supporting infrastructure. The pre-Internet era of ODDE (or most adequately term as just DE) that was massively practiced by open universities is characterized by large physical infrastructure including a multimedia production studio, an enormous warehouse, a bulky computing and examination center, and a physical network of regional, local offices and learning centers. The ODDE after the emergence of the Internet is more characterized by soft infrastructures such as a digital learning environment including LMS and learning analytics. Nevertheless, despite the different characteristics of ODDE infrastructure before and after the arrival of the Internet, digital libraries and quality assurance systems have always been integral parts of the ODDE system.

Another noticeable aspect of ODDE infrastructure is those impacted by the open education movement. The open education movement has provided ODDE with additional supporting infrastructures that have allowed ODDE to be more powerful and cost-effective. Among others, OER have provided ODDE with richer quality learning resources and collaboration opportunities. Finally, with technology constantly evolving, the so-called metaverse is likely to become a future learning environment platform that combines the virtual world and the real world, facilitating various learning and social life needs like on a physical campus to provide a rich and engaging learning experience.