A Health Check of Avondale's Distance Education Program: Where Have we Been? Where are we Going Next?

J. Hinze, M. Northcote, Peter Kilgour, Beverly J. Christian, D. Bolton
{"title":"A Health Check of Avondale's Distance Education Program: Where Have we Been? Where are we Going Next?","authors":"J. Hinze, M. Northcote, Peter Kilgour, Beverly J. Christian, D. Bolton","doi":"10.55254/1835-1492.1393","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Avondale College of Higher Education has been offering tertiary courses for over 120 years. In the past two decades, this institution has extended its programs to include distance courses for students who opt to study online or are not able to attend on-campus courses at Avondale’s Lake Macquarie and Sydney campuses. While all of the institutions courses are evaluated on a regular basis, no formal evaluation had ever been undertaken of the distance education program as a whole. During 2017, a mixed methods research project was conducted to gather evaluative data from recent and current distance students using questionnaires and focus groups. The results of the study provide insight into the extent to which the distance education program at the College provides a space in which learning relationships can develop in online communities. Also, suggestions for future improvement and further research recommendations are provided. Findings of this study may be of interest to educators and administrators who incorporate online components in their curricula. Introduction Avondale was established in 1897 as a faith-based institution with a spiritually focused vision, mission, and motto. By the middle of the twentieth century the College had begun to diversify and offer degrees through external and affiliation programs, offering TEACHR ” “the study provide[s] insight into the extent to which the distance education program ... provides a space in which learning relationships can develop in online communities. TEACH Journal 12-2.indd 14 26/3/19 10:08 pm 14 | TEACH | v12 n2 v12 n2 | TEACH | 15 Educational Administration ” “the distance cohort of students had not yet been specifically targeted to elicit information about their unique experiences of studying via distance its own NSW government accredited degrees from 1974 (Avondale College of Higher Education, 2018). Distance education was introduced in the mid1990s with external affiliation, to upgrade education graduates from diploma to degree status. This was followed in 2000 by a blended Master’s program in three disciplines, and gradually, as the capacity for online learning was developed, more courses were offered in blended or totally distance mode. Since 2008, the number of courses offered online has steadily increased. While early versions of distance education courses at the College involved students enrolling either by on-campus or distance (online) mode, more recent years have seen a lessening of this divide; instead, distance and on-campus students are currently enrolled in the same units and often self-select which aspects of their studies they attend in on-campus or distance mode. This more flexible approach has enabled students to tailor their pattern of attendance to meet the demands of their complex lives. Currently the College offers five undergraduate courses, and eight post graduate courses by distance education using an online mode, and an increasing number of individual units are also offered online. Although Avondale has been offering distance education courses to undergraduate and postgraduate students for almost two decades, a comprehensive review of these students’ experiences had not been undertaken before the study reported in this paper was conducted. Like many other schools and universities, Avondale regularly administers end-of-semester surveys to gather feedback about the quality of the learning experiences of all students who complete on-campus and distance courses, and this feedback has become a valuable source of data in assisting the continual improvement of each course’s curriculum design and teaching methods. However, the distance cohort of students had not yet been specifically targeted to elicit information about their unique experiences of studying via distance. Since 25% of the institutions students choose to complete their entire course by distance and 40% of the College students currently choose to complete some of their studies in a distance mode, this large proportion of the student population at the institution needed to be consulted to ensure the quality assurance system of the institution was representative of all groups of students and to ensure the experiences of distance learners will become more integral to the institution’s direction. Background Because of the convenience of learning online, distance education programs and online learning technologies have become increasingly popular in primary, secondary and tertiary education over the last twenty years. The number of tertiary education students taking at least one online class in the USA in 2006 was approximately 3.5 million (Allen & Seaman, 2007). This number almost doubled to 6.7 million in 2011 (Allen & Seaman, 2013). In 2012, 62.4% of college and universities reported offering distance programs (Allen & Seaman, 2017). In addition to more tertiary students enrolling in online classes, Rovai and Downey (2010) report an increase in the number of distance education programs offered by higher education providers, including for-profit institutions. Indeed, institutions of higher learning are increasingly making distance education an integral part of their long term planning (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2014). The adoption of digital technologies has also increased within the school sector. Schools have been reported as integrating varied degrees of online technologies into their curricula (Neyland, 2011) and groups of educators meet regularly to share ideas about how to use learning technologies in primary and secondary education (Voogt et al., 2017). These trends mean that the issue of program quality is important, as colleges and universities are challenged to provide quality education to a growing number of online students. Many suggestions, guidelines and exemplars of online learning practices have been published previously in various formats such as Herrington and her associates’ (2007) guidelines for authentic course design, Mbati and Minnaar’s (2015) guidelines for facilitating interactive online learning programs and Salmon’s (2013) suggestions about how to design and moderate online learning courses. These guidelines are useful tools for those responsible for designing and teaching online courses which are frequently taken by students studying by distance and/or using online learning technologies. Over the last decade, many of these published guidelines have been consulted and used to guide the design and implementation of online courses for distance students at Avondale. For example, the institution’s Online Learning Policy [policy no. A.35] was modified during recent years to ensure student-centred concepts of learning that focus on engagement and authentic activities were integrated throughout the policy, replacing the use of teacher-centred terms such as “delivery” and “lecturing”. Furthermore, a set of benchmarks have been established, for professional development purposes, reflecting many of the principles and recommended practices from renowned online educators, to guide academic staff in their design of interactive activities in online, blended and on-campus courses. Known as the “Minimum Moodle Expectations”, these benchmarks provide detailed instructions about how to design TEACH Journal 12-2.indd 15 26/3/19 10:08 pm 16 | TEACH | v12 n2 v12 n2 | TEACH | 17 Educational Administration ” “this negative perception of distance education programs has been bolstered by a higher dropout rate among some distance education programs when compared with faceto-face programs learning resources, activities and assessment tasks that engage students in authentic learning across all modes of study. Throughout the history of distance education, various successes and problems have been reported. For example, Allen and Seaman (2013) report that in 2003 only 57.2% of educators “rated the learning outcomes in online education as the same or superior to those in face-to-face” (p. 5). Nine years later, that figure increased to 77 percent (Allen & Seaman, 2013). So, while things have improved, these two studies by Allen and Seaman suggest that there is still a significant proportion (23%), who are less than impressed with distance education programs. And this negative perception of distance education programs has been bolstered by a higher dropout rate among some distance education programs when compared with face-to-face programs (Bell & Federman, 2013; Patterson & McFadden, 2009; Tyler-Smith, 2006). Academic leaders report that this higher dropout rate will impede the growth of distance education programs (Allen & Seaman, 2013). The lack of direct interaction with the lecturer may be a contributing factor in the higher dropout rates of online students. Lack of direct interaction between students and instructors, may allow problems which naturally occur in the course of any instruction to fester, and, if not addressed, these problems may undermine a distance education program (Simonson et al., 2014). Besides leaving the learner frustrated, not addressing the problems can further the perception of distance education programs as being impersonal (Perreault, Waldman, Alexander, & Zhao, 2002; Sunal, Sunal, Odell, & Sundberg, 2003). Addressing problems and assuring that instructors are providing clear channels of communication with their students is critical if the programs are to be successful. In general, distance education programs need to focus upon quality if they are going to continue to attract and retain students (Moore, Lockee, & Burton, 2002). The issue of quality is also important for schools offering some curricula components through use of online technologies, such as wikis in primary schools (Woo, Chu, Ho, & Li, 2011) and online collaborative modules in secondary schools (DeWitt, Siraj, & Alias, 2014). Whether full programs or program components are offered via online technologies, their quality requires monitoring, as do on-campus learning programs and ac","PeriodicalId":171026,"journal":{"name":"TEACH Journal of Christian Education","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"TEACH Journal of Christian Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.55254/1835-1492.1393","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Avondale College of Higher Education has been offering tertiary courses for over 120 years. In the past two decades, this institution has extended its programs to include distance courses for students who opt to study online or are not able to attend on-campus courses at Avondale’s Lake Macquarie and Sydney campuses. While all of the institutions courses are evaluated on a regular basis, no formal evaluation had ever been undertaken of the distance education program as a whole. During 2017, a mixed methods research project was conducted to gather evaluative data from recent and current distance students using questionnaires and focus groups. The results of the study provide insight into the extent to which the distance education program at the College provides a space in which learning relationships can develop in online communities. Also, suggestions for future improvement and further research recommendations are provided. Findings of this study may be of interest to educators and administrators who incorporate online components in their curricula. Introduction Avondale was established in 1897 as a faith-based institution with a spiritually focused vision, mission, and motto. By the middle of the twentieth century the College had begun to diversify and offer degrees through external and affiliation programs, offering TEACHR ” “the study provide[s] insight into the extent to which the distance education program ... provides a space in which learning relationships can develop in online communities. TEACH Journal 12-2.indd 14 26/3/19 10:08 pm 14 | TEACH | v12 n2 v12 n2 | TEACH | 15 Educational Administration ” “the distance cohort of students had not yet been specifically targeted to elicit information about their unique experiences of studying via distance its own NSW government accredited degrees from 1974 (Avondale College of Higher Education, 2018). Distance education was introduced in the mid1990s with external affiliation, to upgrade education graduates from diploma to degree status. This was followed in 2000 by a blended Master’s program in three disciplines, and gradually, as the capacity for online learning was developed, more courses were offered in blended or totally distance mode. Since 2008, the number of courses offered online has steadily increased. While early versions of distance education courses at the College involved students enrolling either by on-campus or distance (online) mode, more recent years have seen a lessening of this divide; instead, distance and on-campus students are currently enrolled in the same units and often self-select which aspects of their studies they attend in on-campus or distance mode. This more flexible approach has enabled students to tailor their pattern of attendance to meet the demands of their complex lives. Currently the College offers five undergraduate courses, and eight post graduate courses by distance education using an online mode, and an increasing number of individual units are also offered online. Although Avondale has been offering distance education courses to undergraduate and postgraduate students for almost two decades, a comprehensive review of these students’ experiences had not been undertaken before the study reported in this paper was conducted. Like many other schools and universities, Avondale regularly administers end-of-semester surveys to gather feedback about the quality of the learning experiences of all students who complete on-campus and distance courses, and this feedback has become a valuable source of data in assisting the continual improvement of each course’s curriculum design and teaching methods. However, the distance cohort of students had not yet been specifically targeted to elicit information about their unique experiences of studying via distance. Since 25% of the institutions students choose to complete their entire course by distance and 40% of the College students currently choose to complete some of their studies in a distance mode, this large proportion of the student population at the institution needed to be consulted to ensure the quality assurance system of the institution was representative of all groups of students and to ensure the experiences of distance learners will become more integral to the institution’s direction. Background Because of the convenience of learning online, distance education programs and online learning technologies have become increasingly popular in primary, secondary and tertiary education over the last twenty years. The number of tertiary education students taking at least one online class in the USA in 2006 was approximately 3.5 million (Allen & Seaman, 2007). This number almost doubled to 6.7 million in 2011 (Allen & Seaman, 2013). In 2012, 62.4% of college and universities reported offering distance programs (Allen & Seaman, 2017). In addition to more tertiary students enrolling in online classes, Rovai and Downey (2010) report an increase in the number of distance education programs offered by higher education providers, including for-profit institutions. Indeed, institutions of higher learning are increasingly making distance education an integral part of their long term planning (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2014). The adoption of digital technologies has also increased within the school sector. Schools have been reported as integrating varied degrees of online technologies into their curricula (Neyland, 2011) and groups of educators meet regularly to share ideas about how to use learning technologies in primary and secondary education (Voogt et al., 2017). These trends mean that the issue of program quality is important, as colleges and universities are challenged to provide quality education to a growing number of online students. Many suggestions, guidelines and exemplars of online learning practices have been published previously in various formats such as Herrington and her associates’ (2007) guidelines for authentic course design, Mbati and Minnaar’s (2015) guidelines for facilitating interactive online learning programs and Salmon’s (2013) suggestions about how to design and moderate online learning courses. These guidelines are useful tools for those responsible for designing and teaching online courses which are frequently taken by students studying by distance and/or using online learning technologies. Over the last decade, many of these published guidelines have been consulted and used to guide the design and implementation of online courses for distance students at Avondale. For example, the institution’s Online Learning Policy [policy no. A.35] was modified during recent years to ensure student-centred concepts of learning that focus on engagement and authentic activities were integrated throughout the policy, replacing the use of teacher-centred terms such as “delivery” and “lecturing”. Furthermore, a set of benchmarks have been established, for professional development purposes, reflecting many of the principles and recommended practices from renowned online educators, to guide academic staff in their design of interactive activities in online, blended and on-campus courses. Known as the “Minimum Moodle Expectations”, these benchmarks provide detailed instructions about how to design TEACH Journal 12-2.indd 15 26/3/19 10:08 pm 16 | TEACH | v12 n2 v12 n2 | TEACH | 17 Educational Administration ” “this negative perception of distance education programs has been bolstered by a higher dropout rate among some distance education programs when compared with faceto-face programs learning resources, activities and assessment tasks that engage students in authentic learning across all modes of study. Throughout the history of distance education, various successes and problems have been reported. For example, Allen and Seaman (2013) report that in 2003 only 57.2% of educators “rated the learning outcomes in online education as the same or superior to those in face-to-face” (p. 5). Nine years later, that figure increased to 77 percent (Allen & Seaman, 2013). So, while things have improved, these two studies by Allen and Seaman suggest that there is still a significant proportion (23%), who are less than impressed with distance education programs. And this negative perception of distance education programs has been bolstered by a higher dropout rate among some distance education programs when compared with face-to-face programs (Bell & Federman, 2013; Patterson & McFadden, 2009; Tyler-Smith, 2006). Academic leaders report that this higher dropout rate will impede the growth of distance education programs (Allen & Seaman, 2013). The lack of direct interaction with the lecturer may be a contributing factor in the higher dropout rates of online students. Lack of direct interaction between students and instructors, may allow problems which naturally occur in the course of any instruction to fester, and, if not addressed, these problems may undermine a distance education program (Simonson et al., 2014). Besides leaving the learner frustrated, not addressing the problems can further the perception of distance education programs as being impersonal (Perreault, Waldman, Alexander, & Zhao, 2002; Sunal, Sunal, Odell, & Sundberg, 2003). Addressing problems and assuring that instructors are providing clear channels of communication with their students is critical if the programs are to be successful. In general, distance education programs need to focus upon quality if they are going to continue to attract and retain students (Moore, Lockee, & Burton, 2002). The issue of quality is also important for schools offering some curricula components through use of online technologies, such as wikis in primary schools (Woo, Chu, Ho, & Li, 2011) and online collaborative modules in secondary schools (DeWitt, Siraj, & Alias, 2014). Whether full programs or program components are offered via online technologies, their quality requires monitoring, as do on-campus learning programs and ac
对埃文代尔远程教育项目的健康检查:我们去了哪里?我们下一步要去哪里?
埃文代尔高等教育学院开设高等教育课程已有120多年的历史。在过去的二十年里,这个机构已经扩展了它的课程,为那些选择在线学习或无法参加埃文代尔麦考瑞湖校区和悉尼校区校园课程的学生提供远程课程。虽然所有机构的课程都定期进行评估,但从未对整个远程教育项目进行过正式的评估。2017年,开展了一项混合方法研究项目,通过问卷调查和焦点小组,收集近期和当前远程学生的评估数据。研究结果揭示了学院的远程教育项目在多大程度上提供了一个学习关系可以在在线社区中发展的空间。并对今后的改进和进一步的研究提出了建议。这项研究的结果可能会对那些将在线组件纳入课程的教育工作者和管理人员感兴趣。埃文代尔成立于1897年,是一所以信仰为基础的机构,以精神为中心的愿景,使命和座右铭。到20世纪中叶,学院已经开始多样化,并通过外部和合作项目提供学位,为教师提供“研究提供了深入了解远程教育项目的程度……提供一个空间,在其中学习关系可以发展在线社区。TEACH Journal 12-2。教育管理“远程队列的学生还没有被专门针对,以获取他们在1974年新南威尔士州政府认可的学位中通过远程学习的独特经历的信息(Avondale College of Higher Education, 2018)。远程教育是在20世纪90年代中期引入的外部联系,以提高教育毕业生从文凭到学位的地位。随后在2000年又推出了三个学科的混合硕士课程,随着在线学习能力的发展,越来越多的课程以混合或完全远程模式提供。自2008年以来,在线课程的数量稳步增长。虽然早期版本的远程教育课程涉及学生通过校园或远程(在线)模式注册,但近年来这种差距已经缩小;相反,远程和校内的学生目前就读于相同的单元,并且经常自主选择他们在校内或远程模式下学习的哪个方面。这种更灵活的方法使学生能够调整他们的出勤模式,以满足他们复杂生活的需求。目前,学院实行远程在线教育,开设5门本科课程、8门研究生课程,并开设越来越多的单科课程。尽管Avondale为本科生和研究生提供远程教育课程已有近二十年的历史,但在本文报道的研究进行之前,并没有对这些学生的经历进行全面的审查。像许多其他学校和大学一样,埃文代尔大学定期进行期末调查,收集所有完成校内和远程课程的学生的学习体验质量反馈,这些反馈已成为帮助不断改进每门课程的课程设计和教学方法的宝贵数据来源。然而,远程队列的学生还没有被明确定位,以获取他们通过远程学习的独特经历的信息。由于25%的学生选择远程完成整个课程,40%的大学生目前选择以远程模式完成部分课程,因此需要咨询机构中这一很大比例的学生群体,以确保机构的质量保证体系代表所有学生群体,并确保远程学习者的经验对机构的发展方向更加不可或缺。由于在线学习的便利性,在过去的二十年里,远程教育项目和在线学习技术在小学、中学和大学教育中越来越受欢迎。2006年,美国接受高等教育的学生中至少有一门在线课程的人数约为350万(Allen & Seaman, 2007)。2011年,这一数字几乎翻了一番,达到670万(Allen & Seaman, 2013)。2012年,62.4%的学院和大学报告提供远程课程(Allen & Seaman, 2017)。 除了更多的大学生参加在线课程外,Rovai和Downey(2010)报告称,高等教育机构(包括营利性机构)提供的远程教育项目数量也有所增加。事实上,高等院校越来越多地将远程教育作为其长期规划的一个组成部分(Simonson, smalldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2014)。学校部门对数字技术的采用也有所增加。据报道,学校将不同程度的在线技术整合到他们的课程中(Neyland, 2011),教育工作者团体定期会面,分享关于如何在小学和中学教育中使用学习技术的想法(Voogt等人,2017)。这些趋势意味着课程质量问题很重要,因为学院和大学面临着向越来越多的在线学生提供高质量教育的挑战。许多在线学习实践的建议、指南和范例已经以各种形式发表,例如Herrington和她的同事(2007)的真实课程设计指南,Mbati和Minnaar(2015)的促进交互式在线学习计划的指南,以及Salmon(2013)关于如何设计和调节在线学习课程的建议。对于那些负责设计和教授在线课程的人来说,这些指导方针是有用的工具,这些课程经常由远程学习和/或使用在线学习技术的学生参加。在过去的十年中,许多这些出版的指导方针被参考并用于指导埃文代尔大学远程学生在线课程的设计和实施。例如,机构的在线学习政策[政策编号]。A.35]近年来进行了修改,以确保在整个政策中纳入以学生为中心、注重参与和真实活动的学习概念,取代了以教师为中心的术语,如“交付”和“讲课”。此外,为了专业发展的目的,我们还建立了一套基准,反映了知名在线教育者的许多原则和建议做法,以指导学术人员设计在线、混合和校园课程的互动活动。这些基准被称为“最低Moodle期望”,提供了如何设计TEACH Journal 12-2的详细说明。教育管理“与面对面的课程相比,一些远程教育课程的辍学率更高,这进一步加深了人们对远程教育课程的负面看法。面对面的课程可以让学生在各种学习模式中进行真实的学习,其中包括学习资源、活动和评估任务。纵观远程教育的历史,各种成功和问题都有报道。例如,Allen和Seaman(2013)报告说,2003年,只有57.2%的教育工作者“认为在线教育的学习成果与面对面教育的学习成果相同或更好”(第5页)。九年后,这一数字增加到77% (Allen和Seaman, 2013)。因此,虽然情况有所改善,但Allen和Seaman的这两项研究表明,仍然有很大比例(23%)的人对远程教育项目印象不深。与面对面课程相比,一些远程教育课程的辍学率更高,这进一步增强了人们对远程教育课程的负面看法(Bell & Federman, 2013;Patterson & McFadden, 2009;Tyler-Smith, 2006)。学术领袖报告说,这种较高的辍学率将阻碍远程教育项目的发展(Allen & Seaman, 2013)。缺乏与讲师的直接互动可能是在线学生辍学率较高的一个因素。学生和教师之间缺乏直接的互动,可能会导致任何教学过程中自然发生的问题恶化,如果不加以解决,这些问题可能会破坏远程教育计划(Simonson et al., 2014)。除了让学习者感到沮丧之外,不解决这些问题还会进一步加深人们对远程教育项目是非个人的看法(Perreault, Waldman, Alexander, & Zhao, 2002;Sunal, Sunal, Odell, & Sundberg, 2003)。解决问题并确保教师与学生提供清晰的沟通渠道是项目成功的关键。一般来说,如果远程教育计划要继续吸引和留住学生,就需要关注质量(Moore, Lockee, & Burton, 2002)。对于通过使用在线技术提供某些课程组件的学校来说,质量问题也很重要,例如小学的wiki (Woo, Chu, Ho, & Li, 2011)和中学的在线协作模块(DeWitt, Siraj, & Alias, 2014)。 无论是通过在线技术提供完整的课程还是课程的组成部分,它们的质量都需要监控,就像校园学习课程和交流一样
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信