Advertisement

Storms clouds on the digital education horizon

  • Thomas C. Reeves
Article

Abstract

ALTHOUGH DIGITAL EDUCATION is growing across all sectors of higher education, many unresolved challenges remain unresolved. This paper focuses on five of them:
  1. 1.

    faculty workload in online teaching,

     
  2. 2.

    the continued dominance of traditional pedagogy in digital higher education,

     
  3. 3.

    the weak state of assessment of outcomes in e-learning initiatives,

     
  4. 4.

    flaws in the accreditation process of distance and flexible learning programs and institutions, and

     
  5. 5.

    the disappointing state of educational research in the area. The paper concludes with recommendations for a strong development research model to address these and associated challenges.

     

Keywords

online teaching pedagogy assessment accreditation development research 

References

  1. Accrediting Commission of the Distance Education and Training Council. (2003).Accreditation handbook. Washington, DC: Distance Education and Training Council. [Online]. Available: http://www.detc.org/content/acredditHandbk.html.Google Scholar
  2. American Federation of Teachers. (2000).Making decisions about post-tenure review: An issues brief by the higher education program and policy council. [Online]. Available: http://www.aft.org/higher_ed/downloadable/posttenure.pdf [2001, December].Google Scholar
  3. Boyer, E.L. (1990).Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate. Princeton, NJ: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.Google Scholar
  4. Britto, M. (2002).An exploratory study of the development of a survey instrument to measure the pedagogical dimensions of web-based instruction. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Georgia.Google Scholar
  5. Brown, A.L. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings.The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2(2), 141–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Clark, R.E. (1983). Reconsidering research on learning with media.Review of Educational Research, 53(4), 445–459.Google Scholar
  7. Cohen, D. (2001, October). Quality control or hindering quality?The Chronicle of Higher Education. [Online]. Available: http://chronicle.com/.Google Scholar
  8. Collins, A. (1992). Towards a design science of education. In E. Scanlon & T. O’Shea (Eds.),New directions in educational technology (pp. 15–22). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  9. Collis, B., Winnips, K., & Moonen, J. (2000). Structured support versus learner choice via the World Wide Web (WWW): Where is the payoff?Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 11(2), 163–196.Google Scholar
  10. Cuban, L. (2001).Oversold and underused: Computers in the classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Daniel, J. (2000).The future of online learning. [Online]. Available: http://www.open.ac.uk/vcs-speeches/Toronto.htm.Google Scholar
  12. DiBiase, D. (2000) Is distance teaching more work or less?American Journal of Distance Education, 14(3), 6–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Driscoll, M.P. (1999).Psychology of learning for instruction (2nd Ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  14. Eaton, J.A. (2001).Distance learning: Academic and political challenges for higher education accreditation (CHEA Monograph Series No. 1). Washington, DC: Council for Higher Education Accreditation.Google Scholar
  15. Fabos, B., & Young, M.D. (1999). Telecommunications in the classroom: Rhetoric versus reality.Review of Educational Research, 69(3), 217–259.Google Scholar
  16. Fairweather, J.S. (1999). The highly productive faculty member: Confronting the mythologies of faculty work. In W.G. Tierney (Ed.),Faculty productivity: Facts, fictions, and issues (pp. 55–98). New York: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
  17. Farrell, E.F. (2002, October). University of Phoenix sees surge in revenues and enrollmentsThe Chronicle of Higher Education. [Online]. Available: http://chronicle.com.Google Scholar
  18. Gomory, R.E. (2000, January 11).Internet learning: Is it real and what does it mean for universities [Online]. Available: http://www.eng.yale.edu/sheff/Gomory_talk.htm [2001, April]Google Scholar
  19. Herrington, J. (1997).Authentic learning in interactive multimedia environments. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Edith Cowan University, Western Australia.Google Scholar
  20. Herrington, J., Oliver, R., & Reeves, T.C. (2002). Patterns of engagement in authentic online learning environments. In A. Williamson, C. Gunn, A. Young, & T. Clear. (Eds.),Proceedings of the 19th Annual Conference of the Australian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education (ASCILITE) (pp. 279–286). Auckland, New Zealand: UNITEC.Google Scholar
  21. Huber, R.M. (1992).How professors play the cat guarding the cream: Why we’re paying more and getting less in higher education. Fairfax, VA: George Mason University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Kearsley, G. (2000).Online education: Learning and teaching in cyberspace. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.Google Scholar
  23. Lagemann, E.C. (2000).An elusive science: The troubling history of educational research. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  24. Laurillard, D. (2002).Rethinking university teaching: A framework for the effective use of learning technologies. London: Routledge/Falmer.Google Scholar
  25. Lee, J. (2002). Faculty and administrator perceptions of instructional support for distance education.International Journal of Instructional Media, 29(1), 27–46.Google Scholar
  26. Leef, G.C., & Burris, R.D. (2002).Can college accreditation live up to its promises? Washington, DC: The American Council of Trustees and Alumni (ACTA). [Online]. Available: http://www.goacta.org/Reports/accrediting.pdf [2002, October].Google Scholar
  27. Levine, A. (2003). Higher education: A revolution externally, evolution internally. In M.S. Pittinsky (Ed.),The wired tower: Perspectives on the impact of the internet on higher education (pp. 13–39). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  28. Lucas, C.J. (1996).Crisis in the academy: Rethinking higher education in America. New York: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
  29. Lynch, M.M. (2002).The online educator: A guide to creating the virtual classroom. London: Routledge/Falmer.Google Scholar
  30. Middaugh, M.F. (2001).Understanding faculty productivity: Standards and benchmarks for colleges and universities. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  31. Miller, D.W. (1999, August 6). The black hole of educational research: Why do academic studies play such a minimal role in efforts to improve the schools?The Chronicle of Higher Education. [Online]. Available: http://chronicle.com.Google Scholar
  32. Mills, S. (Ed.). (1997).Turning away from technology: A new vision for the 21st century. San Francisco, CA: Sierra Club Books.Google Scholar
  33. Morgan, R. (2002, October). Lawmakers call for more accountability from accreditation system.The Chronicle of Higher Education. [Online]. Available: http://chronicle.com.Google Scholar
  34. Neuhauser, C. (2002). Learning style and effectiveness of online and face-to-face instruction.The American Journal of Distance Education, 16(2), 99–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Newman, D. (1990). Opportunities for research on the organizational impact of school computers.Educational Researcher, 19(3), 8–13.Google Scholar
  36. Noble, D.F. (2001).Digital diploma mills: The automation of higher education. New York: Monthly Review Press.Google Scholar
  37. Oliver, R., & Herrington, J. (2002)Teaching and learning online: A beginner’s guide to e-learning and e-teaching in higher education. Mt. Lawley, Western Australia: Centre for Research in Information Technology and Communications, Edith Cowan University.Google Scholar
  38. Palloff, R.M., & Pratt, K. (2001).Lessons from the cyberspace classroom: The realities of online teaching. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  39. Palloff, R.M., & Pratt, K. (1999).Building learning communities in cyberspace. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  40. Paris, D. C. (2001). Is there a professor in this class? In R.A. Cole (Ed.),Issues in web-based pedagogy: A critical primer (pp. 95–110). Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.Google Scholar
  41. Paulson, K.W. (2002). Reconfiguring faculty roles for virtual settings.Journal of Higher Education, 73(1), 123–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Pittinsky, M.S. (Ed.). (2003).The wired tower: Perspectives on the impact of the internet on higher education. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  43. Postman, N. (2003). Questioning media. In M. S. Pittinsky (Ed.),The wired tower: Perspectives on the impact of the internet on higher education (pp. 181–200). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  44. Reeves, T.C. (2000). Socially responsible educational technology research.Educational Technology, 40(6), 19–28.Google Scholar
  45. Reeves, T.C. (1993). Pseudoscience in computer-based instruction: The case of learner control research.Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 20(2), 39–46.Google Scholar
  46. Reeves, T.C., Herrington, J., & Oliver, R. (2002). Authentic activities and online learning. In A. Goody, J. Herrington, & M. Northcote (Eds.),Quality conversations: Research and Development in Higher Education, Volume 25 (pp. 562–567). Jamison, ACT: HERDSA.Google Scholar
  47. Russell, T.L. (1999).The no significant difference phenomenon. Montgomery, AL: International Distance Education Certification Center.Google Scholar
  48. Salmon, G. (2002).E-tivities: The key to active online learning. London: Kogan Page.Google Scholar
  49. Schank, R.C. (2002).Designing world-class e-learning. How IBM, GE, Harvard Business School, and Columbia University are succeeding at e-learning. New York: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
  50. Shulman, L. (2000). Inventing the future. In P. Hutchings (Ed).Opening lines: Approaches to the scholarship of teaching and learning. Menlo Park, CA: Carnegie Publications. Available online at: http://www.carnegiefoundation.org/elibrary/docs/inventing.htm.Google Scholar
  51. Stokes, D.E. (1997).Pasteur’s quadrant: Basic science and technological innovation. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
  52. Stoll, C. (1999).High tech heretic: Why computers don’t belong in the classroom and other reflections by a computer contrarian. New York: Doubleday.Google Scholar
  53. Twigg, C.A. (2003). Quality, cost and access: The case for redesign. In M. S. Pittinsky (Ed.),The wired tower: Perspectives on the impact of the internet on higher education (pp. 111–143). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  54. van den Akker, J. (1999). Principles and methods of development research. In J. van den Akker, N. Nieveen, R.M. Branch, K.L. Gustafson, & T. Plomp, (Eds.),Design methodology and developmental research in education and training (pp. 1–14). The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  55. Weigel, V.B. (2002).Deep learning for a digital age: Technology’s untapped potential to enrich higher education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  56. Young, J.R. (2002, May). The 24-hour professor.The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved online at http://chronicle.com.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Instructional TechnologyUniversity of Georgia, College of EducationAthens

Personalised recommendations