The Move to On-Line Teaching: Some Issues Facing Academics

Dale Dixon

Introduction

In this computer age, there is a push to provide courses on-line or at least provide course materials electronically.  But what does this mean?  To some academics this means placing lecture notes on the appropriate home page of the course or the discipline and providing students access to this resource.  This alternative means of dispensing information is not enough for modern students who are computer literate when they enter university and expect their teachers to be up-to-date with new technologies.  Total on-line course support is a very different approach best described as using the web interface for access to subject outlines, subject resources, course administration, library resources, and computer mediated communication such as e-mail, list servers, and web forums (Smith, 1999).

The on-line mode of course delivery has been described as the ‘virtual university’ or the ‘virtual learning environment’ (VLE).  Virtual learning environments are computer based open systems that allow interaction and access to a wide range of resources (Wilson in Ahmad and Piccoli, 1998).  The advantages of the VLE are many and include, convenience, flexibility, lowering of education costs, currency of material, increased retention, and the ability to transcend geographical barriers.  In the context of education, the transformation to VLE changes the physical boundaries of the classroom, enables more teamwork, allows learning to be a continuous time-independent process, and enables multi-level, multi-speed knowledge creation (Leidner and Jarvenpaa, 1995).  Virtual learning environments allow the learner to take control of content selection, time spent learning, and when to engage in a learning activity (Ahmad and Piccoli, 1998).

Brooks (1997) stated that no one knows how the world-wide-web (WWW) will ultimately be used in teaching as the era of the WWW has just begun.  One thing is certain; the development of web-based technology is dynamic.  The microcomputer is upgraded every six months and with each successive model there is a greater functionality (Stein and Annemieke, 1999), which allows more scope for providing course material on-line.  This means that added burdens are placed on the academic who not only develops on-line course material, but also must stay abreast of the latest advances in computer technology in an effort to keep courses up to date electronically.

The power that the WWW holds over other technologies is that it can be used to present information clearly and attractively, and hypertext can be used to organise the enormous amount of information available (Carvin, 2000).  However, the WWW is overwhelming and the amount of information available is enormous.  Anderson (1999) found that students had difficulty locating information on the WWW because of the vastness of the Internet.  In this aspect the web is user-unfriendly.  Also the teacher should not be fooled by the power of the WWW as it is possible for students to access misinformation (Brooks, 1997).  World wide web information can be a problem to the inexperienced student, since a lot of the information is not refereed.  Unlike scholarly journals in which papers are peer reviewed, everyone has the opportunity to be a publisher on the WWW by establishing a personal home page (Brooks, 1997).

There is a plethora of information available to educators regarding current trends in e-teaching and e-learning.  The Australian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education has an annual conference devoted to current trends in computer-based learning.  Their home page, as well as the papers from previous conferences, can be accessed at http://www.ascilite.org.au/.  If academic staff are going to embrace computer technology and change their current teaching practices then they need to be aware of the experiences of their fellow academics who have embraced these ‘new’ techniques of facilitating learning in the computer age.

E-teaching and e-learning tools can be classified under five functions as described by Berenfeld in Scanlon (1997).  These functions relate to tele-access, virtual publishing, tele-presence, tele-mentoring (tele-courses), and tele-sharing.  Most students have tele-access, that is they have access to resources on-line whether at home or at university.  This is the simplest function that can be incorporated into a university course as each student is usually given on-line access at enrolment.  It is by incorporating the other four functions that a course truly becomes accessible on-line.  By providing students with sites that offer published work on-line the academic has used virtual publishing to enhance the more traditional paper bound published material.  Tele-presence allows students to experience events at remote sites by letting students feel that they are part of an event or virtual experiment.  Tele-mentoring gives students access to other scientists and scholars not generally available in the laboratory.  Collaboration between students and their teachers in the form of e-mail, exchange of information, and access to information is fostered by tele-sharing.  Incorporating all or one of these functions into a course design may or may not enhance the teaching effectiveness of an academic.  It is these tools of e-teaching that will form the focus of discussion in this paper.

Multiple Use of WWW Resources

Some universities or schools within universities have embraced the new technology completely.  The School of Biology at the University of Sydney is developing web-based resources whereby eventually all academic levels within the undergraduate program will be able to access course material via the School’s Home Page (Peat and Franklin, 2000).  The rationale behind the move to VLE is to provide students with all the information required for any one course.  This information ranges from lecture notes, tutorial questions, answers, exercises, as well as access to CyberAdmin and CyberTech for answers to general questions.  There is even a Cybertutor.  The page is set out like the foyer of a building.  There is an elevator to take students to their relevant academic level.  Levels two and three are yet to be developed.  At level one, students have access to Cyberadmin, Cybertech, the handbook, staff details, a number of subject ‘rooms’, the library, a discussion area, as well as hyperlinks to relevant sites outside the university.  Within the subject rooms, students have access to the lecture theatre and to quick quizzes.  The lecture theatre is password protected so that only students enrolled in the course can access the information.  There are also hyperlinks leading back to the foyer, the Cybertech, and the handbook.  Peat and Franklin (2000) have created a resource with the flexibility for future expansion.  The web page can be accessed at http://fybio.bio.usyd.edu.au/vle/L1/.

The Logan campus of Griffith University has also adopted web based classes and on-line activities as its primary learning environment and means of information delivery (Anderson, 1999).  At this virtual university students communicate with their peers and lecturers via electronic forums, notice boards, and e-mail.  These are examples where institutions have used the five e-teaching and e-learning tools mentioned above.  However, in a majority of cases educators are using only one of the five tools.  Tele-sharing, in the form of synchronous or asynchronous discussion forums, appears to be favoured over the other tools as this was one of the first electronic functions used by academics for teaching purposes (Brooks, 1997).

Synchronous and Asynchronous Communication

Access to the WWW offers a number of means by which students can communicate with their teachers and with each other.  E-mail is by far the most common; however, in some cases it has been found that this form of communication does not facilitate conversation and that students don’t tend to use it for academic purposes (Crook and Webster in Clarke 1999).  Instead students prefer other synchronous or asynchronous forms of communication such as web-based forums, Internet Relay Chat (IRC) or tele-conferencing such as the program CUSeeME (Carvin, 2000).  Educators using on-line discussions as a replacement for the traditional face-to-face tutorial have experienced both positive and negative responses.  The main aims of the on-line discussion forum centres around the sharing of knowledge, discussion of ideas, and the contribution to each other’s understanding (McLoughlin and Luca, 1999).

An on-line discussion forum with well-developed strategies to facilitate discussion was integrated into a subject within the Bachelor of Arts degree at Griffith University.  Despite the fact that students were provided with a study guide and questions to promote discussion, Gilbert (1999) identified that students felt that the discussion was too structured and constrained their freedom of thought, which resulted in students opting not to participate in the forum.  Clarke (1999) introduced an asynchronous on-line discussion forum to a Graduate Certificate course at the Queensland University of Technology and found that without direction the discussion faltered and needed input from the educator to keep the thread going.  Except for providing procedural information and explanations when required, McLoughlin and Luca (1999) also provided little intervention to their on-line discussion groups.  In another study, which incorporated four WWW based activities including Internet research, experiments with real time probes, computer simulations, and online discussions, Hoadley and Linn (2000) found that only 15% of the students enrolled in the subject favoured on-line discussion.  The students felt that the on-line discussions were less interesting than the other parts of the course.  It was also felt by the students that the impersonality of the medium was another negative issue with some students favouring the traditional face-to-face tutorials.  However, some students did feel that this method of discussion forced them to know what they were talking about before they posted their message.  These examples illustrate that in some cases on-line discussions are not favourable learning tools.

If asynchronous discussion forums are incorporated with IRC it can provide an excellent means by which remote students can participate and interact with other students.  Synchronous discussion (IRC), has been used with some success with Kimbrough et al., (1998) providing results that show that IRC participation correlated positively with course performance.  They carried out their study on a chemistry class at the University of Colorado.  This university is a non-traditional university in that most of its students are >27 years in age, with >84% in the workforce.  The educators at this university needed to modify the traditional teaching methods to accommodate these students.  They offered the course in a partial distance mode; however, the students were still required to attend practicals on the weekend.  Students needed access to a computer to carry out many of the requirements of the course but were faxed the relevant information if they experienced problems.  It should be pointed out that the students did not need WWW access; they only needed a modem to connect to the university server.  Lectures were delivered via video sent to each student.  E-mail was also used for delivery of assignments and on-line quizzes.  Tutorials were conducted using IRC.  The authors found that IRC tutorial attendance varied from one to 10 students and that the number could be positively correlated with an upcoming exam.  The tutor spent part of the IRC time assessing how far students had progressed through the lecture video.  The tutor answered questions and problems were then set for discussion.  Students posted their answers to the discussion when completed.  The university experienced few technical problems, but did have a problem with the text only format of delivery.  Chemistry has a lot of equations and these had to be modified for this form of teaching.  Thunderstorms also caused down time.  It appears that this method worked well for the course but instructors were unable to control for motivation when they analysed student performance.  Students with high motivation will always do well and the instructors were unable to tell if it was the IRC or individuals motivation that enabled them to succeed.  Students did not feel disadvantaged and found they got to know their colleagues faster than they would have if they were in the traditional lecture setting.

Perceived Advantages

In a student survey of on-line courses at the University of British Columbia a number of benefits that could be applied to any electronic university course were identified by Bartolic-Zlomistic and Bates (1999).  These benefits were that students, had access to international experts, had remote access, had time independence, had experienced collaborative sharing of ideas with other students and teachers, improved their writing and self management skills, and found it a novel way to learn.

These benefits illustrate that students undertaking on-line courses are also identifying the five functionalities to cyber teaching tools.  It is curious that students felt on-line courses helped to improve their writing skills.  In a successful use of e-mail as a communication tool in a human biology class, Hedges and Mania-Farnell (1999) found that because of the extra writing students were required to do to remain in contact electronically, their writing improved.  Clarke (1999) best explained this by noting that students do not like to appear ignorant in the written form.  Written words are remembered but conversation is soon forgotten, so time is taken to compose prose.  If there is only one benefit to on-line delivery of courses and that is improved writing skills, then given the literacy of some undergraduates, academics should incorporate synchronous or asynchronous discussion groups into their courses for this very benefit.

What We Have Learnt

There were a number of findings outlined by Clarke (1999) that would facilitate the usefulness of synchronous or asynchronous discussions as a teaching strategy.  Firstly structure should be provided to the discussion from the onset.  In the traditional university setting students have a timetable of lectures, practicals, and tutorials; however with the lack of a schedule in off-campus on-line courses, students frequently cited time constraints as a barrier to on-line discussion.  McLoughlin and Luca (1999) overcame this problem in their course by making participation compulsory and assessing each student’s contribution to the discussion.  At the end of their study they recommended that the regular input of tutors was necessary in moderating and directing the discussion towards a favourable outcome.  McLoughlin and Luca (1999) also stated that tutor intervention could diminish as students developed the necessary skills of questioning, critical self appraisal of ideas, and problem solving.  A team of professionals was recommended by Clarke (1999) to plan and develop the delivery of on-line courses.  This has been endorsed by a number of other authors who recognise that if academics are to embrace the new technologies and use them in their courses, there needs to be training workshops for staff development (Ellis and Phelps, 1999; Salter and Hansen, 1999; Smith, 1999).  The findings of McLoughlin and Luca (1999) indicated that without providing levels of inquiry, tutor intervention, and assigning tasks to the students, on-line discussion may only provide limited opportunities for learning.  Farrell and Armstrong in Gollin and Kies (1999) concluded that 75% of students surveyed, regarding their perceptions to computer-based learning, desired on-line delivery.  Their most important conclusion, supported by Smith (1999), was that students should have or be provided with adequate access to computers, technological support, and adequate training to become computer literate.

It should be pointed out that like the more traditional face-to-face discussion groups or tutorials in which not all students participate, it is a fallacy to think that all students will participate in discussions using these new technologies (Herrman, 1999 in Clarke, 1999).  Indeed Bartolic-Zlomistic and Bates (1999) concluded that one of the limitations to on-line courses was that it was difficult to know if the quiet students were having problems.  Klemm in Smith (1999) claims that differences in academic background, skills, and life experience reflect the level of participation for the quieter students.  A point to note is that allowing students to provide anonymous contributions to a discussion improves participation (Hsi in Hoadley and Linn, 2000).  Has on-line discussion revolutionised the way students interact with each other and their lecturers or merely provided a hindrance?

Equity Issues of On-line Learning

If universities are to make any progress regarding Information Technology literacy the issue of equity needs to be addressed.  It is not only limited finance that causes this disadvantage to students, but also language barriers, and a limited or disadvantaged education (Gollin and Kies, 1999).  Smith (1999) points out that students often have a lack of confidence, lack of knowledge, and an inherent belief that on-line learning technologies do not enhance what they already received on paper.

The Information Industries Taskforce (1997) pointed out that information and communication technology skills are important and that “all tertiary graduates should be information and communication technology literate in their chosen fields of study and expertise by the year 2000”.  If this has happened it is not clear, but universities are now required to adopt skills assessment for graduates to ensure that graduates have appropriate skills and are therefore marketable in the workplace.  Charles Sturt University has taken the issue of Information Technology literacy one step further by developing a supplementary subject that arms students with the necessary competence to utilise the WWW in their learning (Smith, 1999).

A recent study on computer ownership at the Victorian University of Technology by Stein and Annemieke (1999) indicated that the private ownership of computers is increasing annually.  In the 1999 final year cohort 94% of the students had access to a computer at home, this is an increase of 5% on 1998.  Although this finding is of interest to an academic considering the move to on-line teaching, equity of access still needs to be addressed.  Gollin and Kies (1999) point out that with the move to the new technologies as a way of delivering whole courses at university, the disadvantaged are being further disadvantaged.  In the study by Clarke (1999) some students cited access problems as the only reason they didn’t participate in the on-line discussions.

Gollin and Kies (1999) suggest that to address the equity issue and ensure that all students have equal chances of succeeding via on-line learning, educators should provide testing and evaluate prior knowledge at the beginning of the course and understand that the new technologies can have an inherent bias towards some students.  This of course assumes that students have access to a computer other than at university.  One of the first year mature aged students in Biological Sciences at James Cook University, who is only in his late twenties, claimed that he had never touched a computer before coming to university (Di Barton, pers comm).  Fortunately this is not the case for most students, as most appear to have reasonable computer literacy.  Benson and Hewitt (1998) addressed the issue of equity by surveying the students enrolled in their Bachelor of Social Work subject to establish how many students were able to participate on-line.  They found that only 40% of students had computer access and were therefore able to provide the ‘offline’ students with alternative course materials.

Conclusions

The use of computer-based online teaching methods via the WWW interface is only in its infancy in higher education institutions.  Some universities have embraced these technologies completely but their effectiveness as an educational tool is far from clear.  Some academics have used asynchronous and synchronous discussions to facilitate learning with mixed responses from students.  Whatever mode of on-line teaching an academic decides to use in their teaching, the overriding factor to its success is staff development.  Of all the papers cited in this discussion, staff development and training were found to be essential to the successful execution of an on-line subject.  This was followed closely with providing students with access and the necessary skills to fully participate in these new modes of learning.  Once these technicalities are addressed there is no doubt that on-line teaching will become a successful method for enhancing learning.

References

Disclaimer:  All Internet addresses were checked and active at the time of writing.

Ahmad, R., and Piccoli, G.  1998.  Virtual learning environments: an information technology basic skills course on the web. http://www.isworld.org/ais.ac.98/proceedings/web_teaching.htm.

Anderson, M.  1999.  Virtual universities – future implications for students and academics.  http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/brisbane99/papers/.

Bartolic-Zlomistic, S., and Bates, A.W.  1999. Assessing the Costs and Benefits of Telelearning: A Case Study from the University of British Columbia. http://research.cstudies.ubc.ca/nce/ubcstudy/title.html.

Benson, R., and Hewitt, L.  1998.  Breaking down the barriers:  developing on-line communication in a offline environment.  http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/wollongong98/ascpapers98.html.

Brooks, D. W.  1997.  Web-Teaching.  A guide to designing interactive teaching for the world wide web.  Plenum Press, New York.

Carvin, A.  2000.  EdWeb:  exploring technology and school reform. http://edweb.gsn.org/.

Clarke, S.  1999.  Overcoming the barriers to creating on-line communities. http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/brisbane99/papers/.

Ellis, A., and Phelps, R.  1999.  Staff development for on-line delivery: a collaborative team-based action learning model. http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/brisbane99/papers/.

Gilbert, C.  1999.  Student experiences of flexible learning.  http://www.ascilite.org.au/ conferences/brisbane99/papers/.

Gollin, S., and Kies, D.  1999.  Disadvantaging the disadvantaged? A dialogue. http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/brisbane99/papers/.

Hedges, K., and Mania-Farnell, B.  1999.  Using e-mail to improve communication in the introductory science classroom.  Journal of College Science Teaching.  28(3):198-202.

Hoadley, C. M., and Linn, M. C.  2000.  Teaching sciences through on-line, peer discussions: speakeasy in the knowledge integration environment.  Int. J. Sci. Educ. 22(8):839-857.

Information Industries Taskforce (Australia).  1997. The global information economy: the way ahead / the Information Industries Taskforce.  AGPS, Canberra.  Available on-line from: http://www.dist.gov.au/itt/golds/index.html.

Kimbrough, D. R., Hochgurtel, B. D., and Smith, S. S.  1998.  Using internet relay chat to provide on-line tutorials in a distance-learning chemistry course.  Journal of Science Teaching, 28(2):132-136.

Leidner, D. E., and Jarvenpaa, S. L.  1995.  The use of information technology to enhance management school education: a theoretical view.  MIS Quarterly, 19(3):265.

McLoughlin, C., and Luca, J.  1999.  Lonely outpourings or reasoned dialogue?  An analysis of text-based conferencing as a tool to support learning. http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/brisbane99/papers/.

Peat, M., and Franklin, S.  2000.  A virtual learning environment for first year biology students. UniServe Science News, 16:24.

Salter, G., and Hansen, S.  1999.  Modelling new skills for online teaching. http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/brisbane99/papers/.

Scanlon, E.  1997.  Learning science on-line.  Studies in Science Education, 30:57-92.

Smith, E.  1999.  Learning to learn on-line. http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/brisbane99/papers/.

Stein, A., and Annemieke, C.  1999.  The web, chat and laptops: IT practices & skills of transition students (1999).  http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/brisbane99/papers/.