- Email: [email protected]
The Framework for DIRECTED Online Learning Environments
The Framework for DIRECTED Online Learning Environments Laurie P. Dringus Steve Terrell
Nova Southeastern University, Ft. Lauderdale, FL, USA
A steady increase in the development and use of online instructional delivery systems in higher education institutions is expected to occur over the next few years. Online learning environments (OLEs) will emerge to provide comprehensive support for the process of learning and instruction. Currently, educators and administrators are seeking guidance for conceptualizing and implementing OLEs. A framework is needed to represent the essential aspects of OLE development and use, and to address the complex nature of OLEs. This paper offers a definition for OLEs. Also, a framework is presented to support a ``directed'' approach to OLEs that provides a basis for planning, designing, implementing and evaluating OLEs, and for online courses contained within OLEs. The elements of the framework for DIRECTED OLEs, Delivery, Interaction, Resources, Evaluation, Culture, Technology, Education, and Design, are defined and issues concerning the elements are presented.
Introduction Within a few short years the Internet has sparked the rapid growth of online learning delivery systems used to form ``cyberschools,'' ``online campuses,'' and ``electronic classrooms.'' This movement has driven higher education institutions in particular to the World Wide Web to attract students to institutions by offering online courses and degree programs. Online instruction is typically delivered via dedicated Web-based hypertext systems used to store a variety of relevant course information such as syllabi, examples of student work, class notes, announcements, tutorials, and other information. Such practice is quickly becoming a common model for online instruction in an attempt to give learners and faculty convenient access to information that has been traditionally imparted through face-to-face contact. Along this theme, online instruction as a delivery paradigm is beginning to be viewed as an alternative or supplement to traditional classroom instruction for occasions when physical classroom space may be limited (Dringus & Terrell, 1996). Also, online instruction is being recognized as a convenient method by which adult learners can pursue their educational goals without disengagement from job commitments or imposing on learners extensive travel to campus Direct all correspondence to: Dr. Laurie P. Dringus, Nova Southeastern University, School of Computer and Information Sciences, P.O. Box 290600, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33329-0600. E-mail: [email protected] The Internet and Higher Education 2(1): 55 ± 67 Copyright D 1999 Elsevier Science Inc.
ISSN: 1096-7516 All rights of reproduction in any form reserved.
55
56
DRINGUS AND TERRELL
facilities (Dringus & Terrell, 1996; Scigliano, Levin, & Horne, 1996; Benyon, Stone, & Woodroffe, 1997). A steady increase of online instruction is expected to occur along with the emergence of online learning environments (OLEs) that will provide comprehensive support for the process of learning and instruction. An OLE is the foundation upon which an effective learning environment is conveyed to learners, faculty, and other stakeholders. The foundation of an OLE rests on the notion of providing an environment that can be reached at anytime and from any location, and is conducive to supporting quality academic learning and communication activities. Layered within OLEs are online courses and activities facilitated by an integration of a variety of appropriate instructional and communication technology tools. Online courses become components of a distinct, legitimate, comprehensive and pedagogically meaningful learning environment (Dringus & Terrell, 1998). Given foreseeable trends in this early era of online instruction, developing a comprehensive definition for OLEs is important. In addition, it is important to identify the essential elements that comprise OLEs as well as consider the various issues that pertain to OLE development and use. It is important also to evaluate how OLEs may influence the overall process of online learning and instruction. In this paper, the authors provide a definition for OLEs and a framework that serves as a guide for recognizing several key elements of OLEs. The issues are explored in a framework, one that supports a ``directed'' approach to OLEs. The elements of the framework for DIRECTED OLEs, Delivery, Interaction, Resources, Evaluation, Culture, Technology, Education, and Design, are defined and issues concerning the elements are presented. The DIRECTED framework provides a basis for planning, designing, implementing and evaluating OLEs and for online courses contained within OLEs. The framework is intended to be used with existing instructional systems delivery models. The main objective of this article is to provide breadth about the range of foundational issues connected with OLEs.
Related Background It is anticipated that OLEs will be used to augment traditional classroom pedagogic practices and to provide extensibility to the use of educational institution-based Web sites (Dringus, 1995a; Terrell, 1997). While educators are anxious to test the waters of online instruction, often the transition occurs with limited understanding of the unique aspects that exist in the online environment that may be different from the traditional classroom environment. As an example, the literature has cited case studies and experiences about the new roles of faculty and learners that emerge in computer-mediated courses (Harasim, Hiltz, Teles, & Turoff, 1995; Neal, 1997, Shotsberger, 1997; McLellan, 1998). In addition, some online instruction practices may not be scalable from what has been practiced in the traditional classroom paradigm. Some reported problems involving scale of delivery include, for example, time management of learners and faculty (Harasim et al., 1995; Collis & Remmers, 1997), large class sizes (Harasim et al., 1995), courses that are largely lecture-based (Harasim et al., 1995), the use of traditional learning metaphors in online classrooms (Harasim, Calvert, & Groeneboer, 1997) and the degree to which
FRAMEWORK FOR DIRECTED OLES
57
online learners are expected to interface with instructors and collaborate with peers (McLellan, 1998). These problem areas indicate that much is unknown about online instruction as a delivery paradigm. The literature has provided limited theory or conceptual foundation for distance education (Marsden, 1996), for technology-enhanced student-centered learning environments (Hannafin & Land, 1997), or for online instruction in particular. Marsden noted that distance education as a field acks conceptual coherence, due to general ad hoc organization and mismanagement of distance education efforts and ill-defined problems that are difficult to control. A lack of conceptual coherence can be associated with online instruction as well. Educators who are new to online instruction are often conceptualizing what online instruction is while they are implementing their courses. Without readily available literature devoted to theory and conceptual foundations for online instruction, faculty and learners tend to rely on information that is largely limited to prescriptive discussions about the current use and advantages of online instruction. The limited scope of available information lacks depth and breadth when describing online instruction as a delivery paradigm. The result of a lack of theory or conceptual basis for online instruction may translate to less than optimal online learning experience for learners and faculty, particularly during trial and error stages of implementation. Associated with the lack of conceptual coherence of the online instruction paradigm is the issue of what defines an OLE and how an OLE can be recognized. Generally, online courses have been perceived as ``electronic versions'' of traditional classroom courses taught face-to-face in a physical meeting space (Marsden, 1996). In the traditional classroom, the ``environment'' is recognized by the presence of the campus consisting of buildings and walls. Courses are self-contained activities perceived to occur within a structure of buildings and behind walls. What distinguishes an OLE apart from a physical structure? What is the structure of an OLE besides the obvious property of virtuality? Single online courses often do not support the perception of a distinct learning environment. The notion of presence is missing in view of campus and/or other educational entities (e.g., lecture halls, auditoriums, study rooms, etc.) that are recognizable from the traditional metaphors of learning and instruction. Therefore, it remains unclear about what defines an OLE and how an OLE can be recognized as a distinct entity. Some authors have offered descriptions of components and foundations for distance education systems. Moore and Kearsley (1996) described a systems approach to recognize the interacting and interdependent set of components that define a distance education system. These components included the variety of processes that contain teaching, learning, communications and management in a distance education environment. The authors presented a model of five components for distance education: sources, design, delivery, interaction and the learning environment. These components also contained subsystems that include issues of instructional design. Similarly, Hannafin and Land (1997) described five foundations for a technology-enhanced student-centered learning environment: psychological, pedagogical, technological, cultural and pragmatic. Hannafin and Land identified foundations and underlying assumptions common across student-centered designs. Computer-mediated learning environments were identified and included as an example of a student-centered design.
58
DRINGUS AND TERRELL
A framework is needed also to represent the essential aspects of the development and use of OLEs. Moore and Kearsley's (1996) systems approach is a start toward considering essential components for developing distance education programs, but not OLE development specifically. Hannafin and Land (1997) proposed the need for student-centered learning systems that encourage divergent reasoning, problem solving and critical thinking in learning activities. They presented a generic model that could be supported by a variety of technology systems, including computer-mediated learning environments. Dringus and Terrell (1996; 1998) specifically discussed the need for a conceptual framework for the development and use of an OLE. They addressed the need for a framework that first must support learning and teaching styles of learners and faculty, respectively, and meet the technical and instructional challenges of online instructional delivery. A successful framework for OLEs requires several elements to be infused into the instructional delivery systems lifecycle. The elements of the proposed framework for DIRECTED OLEs (Delivery, Interaction, Resources, Evaluation, Culture, Technology, Education and Design) are highly conceptual in nature. Conceptual as they are, the elements also need to be conveyed through the interface and through various actions of stakeholders (i.e., faculty, administrators, staff and learners) to produce a comprehensive learning and communication environment. Before fully exploring the framework for DIRECTED OLEs, a definition of an OLE is offered. Defining an OLE We define an OLE as a distinct, pedagogically meaningful and comprehensive online learning environment by which learners and faculty can participate in the learning and instructional process at anytime and any place. OLEs manifest a variety of technical tools that support instructional delivery and communication in online formats. In addition, dynamic delivery structures are embedded to enhance the instructional, learning and communication processes taking place. This definition supports the need for a composite view of an OLE. To explore the definition, distinguishing some primary differences between online courses and OLEs is important. Currently, online courses can be distinguished by the primary use of a variety of technology components or tools. Technology components or tools may include the use of Web-based hypertext menus to post course syllabi and other information. Electronic communication tools may be used to support electronic classroom meetings and activities through asynchronous and synchronous communication (e.g., E-mail, bulletin boards, chat software, etc.). Other technology components or tools may include the use of electronic libraries and research database systems and online tours of external sources of information (e.g., Internet-based businesses, government, educational sites, etc.). Online courses emerge from the integration and use of one or more of these technology components or tools. Online courses are self-contained course presentations designed by individual instructors who package typical course material (for example, course syllabi, assignments and announcements) in a prearranged computer-mediated format. When technology components or tools are used separately or in combination, support for online instruction is possible. However, the presence of technology components or tools alone does not necessarily result in having established an effective OLE. The strategy for supporting self-contained online courses emphasizes the role of independent
FRAMEWORK FOR DIRECTED OLES
59
or non-directed environments that can stand apart from or exist outside the learning system or environment at large. However, online courses are often designed without a comprehensive objective to achieve the design of a distinct and standalone learning environment for online instruction (Dringus & Terrell, 1996). Under such condition, the effectiveness of online learning could be viewed as less than optimal (Dringus & Terrell, 1998), particularly when given evidence of ad hoc organization (Marsden, 1996) and extemporaneous management of online courses. Like typical online course components described above, OLEs manifest a variety of technical tools that support instructional delivery and communication in online formats. Yet, OLEs have an extended purpose of offering learners and faculty the ability to focus on the educational process at large, by providing dynamic delivery structures that promote an effective learning environment beyond the mere presence of an online course presentation. Dynamic delivery structures are contained within the OLE proper. Examples of delivery structures may include an extensive set of metaphors that visually and conceptually match more traditional resources that reflect a physical campus such as a library, study hall, student discussion hall, orientation room, research lab and help center (Dringus & Terrell, 1998). Other examples of delivery structures may include information resources, communication, collaborative activities, and other dynamics that learners may want to reach, participate in, or use (Dringus, 1995b). Resmer (1998) described the need for Internet architectures for learning in which there are ``readily accessible instructional objects that can be easily located, aggregated, and customized'' ( p. 105) in learning environments. The Instructional Management Systems (IMS) project, sponsored by EDUCAUSE, is aimed to promote open specifications for facilitating online activities such as locating and using educational content, tracking learner progress, reporting learner performance, and exchanging student records between administrative systems (Resmer, 1998). The considerations of the IMS project are similar to what we describe in this article as dynamic delivery structures in an OLE. From the OLE, prearranged delivery structures can be drawn to be used in self-contained online courses as needed. Overall, the delivery structures integrated in the OLE are there to promote a deeper sense of awareness that an online campus exists. Additionally, OLEs support a learner-centered paradigm that focuses on learners as active players in the learning process. OLEs enable learners to become the center of the learning experience with readily available support of peers, faculty and administration. The process of learning and communication in OLEs can occur anytime and from any location. The idea of classroom shifts an emphasis from perceiving the traditional physical environment as a sole location for learning to occur, to an emphasis toward perceiving a communication-enriched computing environment that encompasses the world of information at large. The Framework for DIRECTED OLEs By identifying differences between online courses and OLEs, a definition of an OLE has been proposed. Next, a framework for OLEs is needed to bring together online courses in a learner-centered environment. The motivation for the framework is derived from the recognition that the use of online communication and instructional tools alone (such as Web pages, E-mail, conference chat rooms, electronic blackboards, etc.) does not necessarily lead to a perception of learners and faculty that a distinct OLE exists that
60
DRINGUS AND TERRELL
Figure 1.
Framework for DIRECTED OLEs
supports learning and communication in an online course. In addition, emulating the traditional classroom as an instructional paradigm in online form may be difficult to achieve. We view the problem as a lack of a systematic approach to conceptualizing and implementing OLEs as unique and distinct learning environments. One way to approach the problem is to recognize that online instruction without careful attention to the broader OLE concepts (such as the elements of the DIRECTED framework), results in a non-directed approach. It was mentioned earlier, in connection with online courses, that the non-directed approach is evident when there is a lack of objective to achieve an effective design of a distinct and standalone learning environment for online instruction. Non-directed OLEs lack specific purpose and consistency as they only promote online courses as independent products of individual faculty member's efforts. Conversely, the directed approach takes on the overall goal of OLE Ð to offer a conceptual frame of several elements that form an effective and a distinct OLE. The notion of direction is offered to explore a variety of learning and/or instructional approaches that would fit well into online learning scenarios. Direction can imply negative connotations in approach as well. For example, an emphasis on structure may be overly limiting to offer choices about implementations. Instead, we offer the notion of direction, and the directed approach in particular, as a broad perspective to bring to the surface the many issues that port into successful OLEs.
FRAMEWORK FOR DIRECTED OLES
61
Table 1. The Framework for DIRECTED OLEs: The Elements and their Definitions Element
Definition
Delivery
A process of presenting and maintaining an Online Learning Environment. Delivery consists of a continuum of instructional, managerial, and technical challenges that must be met to provide learners and faculty with a clear perception of the OLE structure or design and the conceptual mapping or elements of the OLE. The embodiment of meaningful communication and collaboration between faculty and learners, with appropriate choices of communication modes and online tools that are best suited to match the learning and teaching styles of learners and faculty, respectively. Human, information, learning, and technical dimensions that bring the OLE to life. Human resources include faculty, administrative and technical staff, and learners. Information and learning resources include internal and external information or activities that are presented, accessed, utilized or performed. Technical resources include computer-mediated tools that are support mechanisms for human communication and learning activity in OLEs. An iterative process for assessing the efficacy and validity of OLEs. Evaluation should take place from the conceptual stage of OLE development through the measurement of learning outcomes of an online course. Accurate and ongoing assessments of the learner, the instructional process, the course content, and the OLE as an entity, will include a combination of formative and summative evaluations for each of these components and their effectiveness as a unit. Identifying the new roles that learners and faculty take on in OLEs, as well as an understanding of a shift toward a learner-centered paradigm. A ``culture'' emerges in OLEs that supports the notion that learners and faculty are resources for each other, and that learners interface with the world of information at large. Robust and activity-oriented mechanisms and tools that are interfaced by the computer-mediated environment. Computing requirements must be established and will vary depending on the scale to which online learning and communication is to be offered. Technology training and support need to be provided to OLE stakeholders. OLE technology tools provide the means to faculty and learners to participate in learning and communication activities without time or place constraints. OLE technology tools enable the learning and instructional process to seamlessly flow online. The embodiment of learning and instructional processes directed toward supporting a learner-centered paradigm. Pedagogically meaningful OLEs support active learning and instructional processes with the appropriate choice and implementation of learner-centered metaphors that match specific communication and learning objectives and tasks. Included in the continuum of delivery challenges are critical areas of concern for design: instructional methods and online delivery methods, conceptual design and learning modality issues, delivery logistics for faculty and staff, management of OLE activities and services, and technical tools and communication mechanisms to support OLE activities and services.
Interaction Resources
Evaluation
Culture
Technology
Education
Design
The framework for DIRECTED OLEs is shown in Fig. 1. The proposed framework is intended to identify several key elements that, when fully integrated, support an effective online learner-centered paradigm. Fig. 1 presents a circle at which the OLE is the core of the framework. The OLE is essentially formed through successful integration of the elements. On the outer layer of the framework, the elements are presented as disparate and unique categories that also interact with other elements. The connecting line of each element to the inner circle indicates the total integration of the elements that represent the OLE proper. Through integration of the elements, the framework for DIRECTED OLEs distills and defines the formation of the core, which is the OLE itself. As noted in the introduction, the framework serves as a guide for recognizing several key elements of OLEs. The DIRECTED framework supports an iterative process of planning, designing, implementing and evaluating OLEs, and for online courses contained within OLEs. The framework itself is not an instructional delivery systems model, but is
62
DRINGUS AND TERRELL
intended to be used with existing instructional delivery systems models. The main objective of the framework is to bring visibility to and organize the breadth of major foundational aspects of OLEs. The eight elements are briefly introduced in this section and are more formally defined in Table 1. Delivery deals with the process of presenting and maintaining an OLE. Interaction focuses on the issues of enabling communication and interaction among faculty, learners and other external information providers. The Resources element addresses issues of enabling information, technical, administrative, faculty and learner support in OLEs. Evaluation focuses on issues about evaluating learner performance, course content outcomes in OLEs, and assessing the validity of OLEs. Culture deals with the social structure of the online classroom and the unique culture that emerges from the environment and activity within OLEs. Technology centers on issues of providing quality communication and instructional tools and supporting synchronous and asynchronous learning modes in OLEs. Education involves a range of essential pedagogical issues that pertain to supporting the learning and instructional process in OLEs. Design concentrates on issues involved with designing components for online instruction and the visual and functional composition of OLEs. For an OLE to be effective, there must be an integration of instructional, managerial and technical challenges that must be addressed in each element from the onset of planning for an OLE through the ongoing use of an OLE. Also, the elements of the framework for DIRECTED OLEs encompass the essential issues that go into the conceptualization, planning, design, implementation and evaluation process of OLEs, along with the considerations of culture, communication tools, interactions, instructional delivery, learning activities, technology components, pedagogy and resources that must be explored to offer sound online instruction. These elements taken separately are unique and encompass their own characteristics. Taken together the elements form a distinct and comprehensive OLE. Through integration, the elements are ``directed'' toward achieving an effective OLE. Table 1 presents the elements of the DIRECTED framework and definitions for each element. The definitions are intended to capture characteristics of each element. The Integration of the DIRECTED OLE Elements The elements and their issues inevitably integrate with other DIRECTED OLE elements. Integration is complex and requires some thoughtful attention to use the framework as a guide for the development and use of OLEs. A summary of how the elements are integrated or related is offered here. For example, ill-made decisions could result from the purchase of collaborative online communication tools (Technology) if there is not a clear understanding of how effectively the tools would support communication in a learning context between faculty and students (Interaction and Education). Likewise, some early challenges must be met before subsequent challenges can be contended with. For example, to what extent would online instruction be used to deliver a course or courses (Delivery)? From that question arises a range of issues to be explored. For example, what skills are needed by faculty to prepare and deliver online courses effectively (Resources)? Also, logistics must be identified and communicated for faculty and staff to manage the online learning process. Such logistics may include class size, faculty loads, online
FRAMEWORK FOR DIRECTED OLES
63
services, academic policies, and presentation of online information and materials (Delivery and Education). In addition, decisions must be made related to integrating the best choice online tools that match the learning activity (Interaction, Technology and Design). The Design and Delivery elements are related to how the design and composition of the OLE will convey to learners and faculty a sense of ongoing learning activity. Design and Delivery issues also involve how an OLE should be presented. In addition, the Design, Delivery, Technology and Interaction elements are related to issues that address the appropriate mix of technology and human intervention needed to convey the effectiveness of an OLE. In addition, the Education and Culture elements address issues of changes of philosophy toward pedagogy in online settings. The Interaction and Culture elements address issues related to recognizing learner and faculty communication protocols in OLEs. The Resources and Technology elements share issues related to determining technical resources needed, including an Evaluation of requirements, costs, management resources, etc. The Culture, Education and Resources elements share issues regarding changes in roles and responsibilities of stakeholders in OLEs. There is also overlap of Education issues with issues that are relevant to the instructional challenges of Delivery. The Evaluation element involves issues that permeate across all other elements in that the entire system (learner, instructor, curricular material, instructional methods, technology use, design and delivery system, etc.) should be assessed and reviewed as an integral part of the development of an effective OLE. Each element involves several issues that lead to either formative or summative evaluation of the issues. A Preview of Issues Concerning the Elements Describing the essentials of each element in detail is beyond the scope of this overview article. However, definitions alone (Table 1) do not show the range of issues that spans each element. Potential research questions and issues that may be explored in the future for each element are given in this section. Future articles discussing the DIRECTED framework should explore, in-depth, the elements and those issues subsumed under the elements. For example, a good deal of effort made by planning committees is geared toward Delivery issues. How should an OLE be presented? What is an OLE for an institution's specific purpose? What is the appropriate mix of technology and human intervention needed? Distinguishing differences between delivering information and delivering learning is also important (Bork & Britton, 1998). Future exploration is needed to provide intervention strategies for an extensive range of instructional, managerial and technical challenges that span the Delivery element. One example of an intervention strategy was noted by Cravener (1998) in which integrated distributed learning environments (IDLEs) are being explored to support interactive learning on the Web. Interaction is an element that is not well understood within the confines of online environments because there is a limited understanding of essential dimensions of interaction and how the dimensions come into play in online settings. For example, one dimension of interaction is feedback. Naidu (1994) reported that feedback in distance learning settings is essential to the learning process. Yet, the extent to which this component is understood has not been researched in online courses or online settings. Further, Interaction as an element must be understood as to appropriate choices of
64
DRINGUS AND TERRELL
communication modes such as asynchronous and synchronous interaction (Harasim et al., 1995), and the online tools that are best suited to match the learning and teaching styles of learners and faculty. Berge (1999) recommended that we distinguish differences between the necessity for students to interact with course content cognitively (intrapersonal interaction) and the importance of students interacting with one another and their instructors about content (interpersonal interaction). In addition, as OLEs steadily emerge, recognizing interaction within its own context as a critical construct of the online experience is important. Initiatives directed toward the development of OLEs must include a substantial analysis and review of a variety of Resources needed to produce an OLE (Dringus, 1999). Attention is often given to technical resources. Other resources include human resources, information resources and learning resources. Each of these ``resources'' categories contain their own unique set of requirements and considerations. However, each ``resources'' category cannot be viewed only within its own structure. Resources-based decisions account for influences or consequences of decisions connected to and balanced among the variety of resources being considered. The interplay of resources may be evaluated as to the support and infrastructure needed to provide a functional and efficient OLE. OLEs are anticipated to assume a more prominent role as a medium for instruction in the future. Teaching methodologies applied to OLEs will call for new and different ways of assessing learners, instructional methods, and the instructional process as a whole (Ravitz, 1997; Terrell, 1997). Not to adequately evaluate these components in OLEs could result in the risk of not ensuring the highest degree of learning effectiveness possible in online settings. The Evaluation element needs to be explored more fully in this context. The Culture element needs to be more fully explored as to comprehending the roles that learners and faculty assume for a learner-centered paradigm (Barr & Tagg, 1995) in online settings. Comprehending a culture that emerges from an acceptance of a learning paradigm is essential to expand the scope of learning activities in OLEs that have been historically classroom or laboratory managed. Future research is needed in this context. One of the fastest areas of Internet growth is the application of online learning delivery systems. The Technology element addresses issues associated with determining what online learning technologies enable faculty and designers the ability to create a customized education system that also facilitates ease of use for both faculty and learners. The Technology element also addresses the need to provide embedded tools to support a variety of structured or unstructured online activities. A structured set of online tools to expand course content in OLEs is essential to the success of online degree programs. The technical environment and computing platform must support a variety of academic disciplines and courseware formats. Robust tools need to be developed to enable learning activities that are collaborative and knowledge building oriented. Efficient administrative tools are needed to facilitate the efficient management and maintenance of the OLE. Computing requirements and policies for use must be established (Riddle, Nott, & Pearce, 1996). The Education element is broadly defined as the embodiment of learning and instructional processes directed toward supporting a learner-centered paradigm. Essentially, the learner-centered paradigm requires a shift in thinking of all stakeholders Ð learners, instructors and administrators Ð from one of providing instruction to one of producing learning (Barr & Tagg, 1995). This philosophy can then be connected to the
FRAMEWORK FOR DIRECTED OLES
65
development of pedagogically meaningful OLEs. The issues involved with implementing and achieving this paradigm are extensive. Research is needed to learn more about the critical challenges that faculty and learners must contend with, along with strategies for action that faculty and learners need to enable instruction and learning in OLEs. Kroder, Suess, and Sachs (1998) recommended that faculty are provided sufficient lead, preparation time and training to develop an online course. They also discussed the importance of providing ongoing training to learners and faculty to use online tools appropriately. There are many issues associated with the Education element. It may be necessary that the Education element includes its own iterative development lifecycle process to work through the many stages of development and use of OLEs from the variety of instructional, pedagogical and learning perspectives involved. The Design element involves issues related to the ways in which technology use should be structured in visual and interactive ways to optimize learning in an OLE. This element involves providing interactive mechanisms for learners to connect to and to complete a variety of specific tasks such as conducting research, communicating with others, locating information, and other tasks (Dringus & Terrell, 1998; Resmer, 1998). Design issues also involve attention to the resources Ð human, technical, information and learning resources Ð needed to create a visual and coherent OLE. Interface design and human±computer interaction issues need to be explored more fully in context of the Design element. Conclusion The framework for DIRECTED OLEs is introduced as a guide that can be used to distill and define the essential foundational aspects involved in achieving a comprehensive and an effective OLE. The eight disparate elements contain several categories of issues that need to be addressed, as appropriate, through an iterative development lifecycle. The OLE development lifecycle involves the stages of planning, design, implementation and evaluation. Through this iterative process, when several key elements are examined and integrated to form an OLE, the possibility increases to support a learner-centered paradigm in an online format. The authors introduce the need for a more formal approach to conceptualizing and implementing OLEs as distinct learning environments. The literature is scant in providing formal models or frameworks for the development and use of OLEs. The context of this article is mainly geared toward providing a framework that can be used to begin the process of extracting issues and concerns that need to be organized and contained within a comprehensive structure. The framework for DIRECTED OLEs is a guide educators could use to recognize and address the scope of complex concerns that are significant to the process of online instructional delivery. In addition, the authors provide a definition for an OLE, a definition for each element of the DIRECTED framework, and a summary of how elements are integrated. An OLE is defined in this article by describing the elements of the framework for DIRECTED OLEs, yet there is much work to be done to examine each element as a unique component that interacts with other elements. The DIRECTED approach is proposed to provide context to the need for having a ``directed'' orientation to promote careful attention to critical OLE concepts and issues. Marsden (1996) noted that learning
66
DRINGUS AND TERRELL
to teach at a distance usually develops in an ad hoc manner. Overall, the non-directed approach is viewed as an ad hoc orientation to online course or OLE development and delivery. In this article, the authors look to promote online learning by stating that a directed approach is a frame of reference from which the design of a distinct and stand-alone learning environment for online instruction can be achieved. The framework for DIRECTED OLEs is offered to give educators a systematic approach to conceptualizing and implementing OLEs; one that requires thoughtful attention to issues of pedagogy, culture, technology, resources, etc., throughout an iterative development lifecycle. Overall, the framework for DIRECTED OLEs advocates the need for structure over ad hoc planning and implementation of online courses or OLEs. An extensive exploration of the elements is needed to more fully comprehend how the core of online instruction, the OLE, affords the engagement of quality instruction and communication in a computer-mediated format. Taken separately the elements are unique and encompass their own characteristics. While all elements are unique, they require integration with each other to form an effective OLE. However, research is needed to more fully explore each element. Presently, the building blocks for developing and implementing effective OLEs are sketchy. It is possible that OLEs are being developed on the basis of ad hoc decisions or convenience of availability of technology tools. Instead, sound theory and formal methods should be followed to plan and implement OLEs. Future development is needed of models or frameworks that can be used to support the development of OLEs. In conjunction, research is needed to study quality and effectiveness of what is being carried out in OLEs. References Barr, R., & Tagg, J. (1995). From teaching to learning Ð a new paradigm for undergraduate education. Change, 13 ± 25. Benyon, D., Stone, D., & Woodroffe, M. (1997). Experience with developing multimedia courseware for the World Wide Web: The need for better tools and clear pedagogy. International Journal of Human±Computer Studies, 47(1). Available at http://ijhcs.open.ac.uk/benyon/benyon-nf.html. Berge, Z. L. (1999). Interaction in post-secondary web-based learning. Educational Technology, 5 ± 11. Bork, A., & Britton, D. R. (1998). The web is not suitable for learning. IEEE Computer, 115 ± 116. Collis, B., & Remmers, E. (1997). The world wide web in education: Issues related to cross-cultural communication and interaction. In B. Kahn (Ed.), Web-based instruction ( pp. 85 ± 92). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications. Cravener, P. (1998). Education on the web: a rejoinder. IEEE Computer, 107 ± 108. Dringus, L. P. (1995a). Interface issues associated with using the Internet as a link to online courses. Journal of Interactive Instruction Development, 8(2), 16 ± 20. Dringus, L. P. (1995b). An interactive usability evaluation procedure for interactive online courses. Journal of Interactive Instruction Development, 7(4), 10 ± 14. Dringus, L. (1999). Connecting resources in online learning environments. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration. [Online] http://www.westga.edu/ ~ distance/. Dringus, L., & Terrell, S. (1996). Technical and instructional challenges of delivering online distance learning courses. Paper presented at the International Multimedia 96 Conference (SALT), Arlington, VA. Dringus, L., & Terrell, S. (1998). Awareness as a metaphor in online learning environments. Paper presented at the International Conference on Technology and Education (ICTE), March 8 ± 11, 1998. Santa Fe, New Mexico. Hannafin, M. J., & Land, S. M. (1997). The foundations and assumptions of technology-enhanced student-centered learning environments. Instructional Science, 25, 167 ± 202. Harasim, L., Hiltz, S. R., Teles, L., & Turoff, M. (1995). Learning networks. A field guide to teaching and learning online. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
FRAMEWORK FOR DIRECTED OLES
67
Harasim, L., Calvert, T., & Groeneboer, C. (1997). Virtual U: A Web-based system to support collaborative learning. In B. Kahn (Ed.), Web-based instruction149±158 ( pp. 149±158). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications. Kroder, S. L., Suess, J., & Sachs, D. (1998). Lessons in launching Web-based courses. Technological Horizons in Education (T.H.E. Journal), 66 ± 69. Marsden, R. (1996). Time, space, and distance education. Distance Education, 17(1), 222 ± 246. McLellan, H. (1998). The internet as a virtual learning community. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 9(2), 92 ± 112. Moore, M. G., & Kearsley, G. (1996). Distance education: A systems view. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Naidu, S. (1994). Applying learning and instructional strategies in open learning. Distance Education, 15(1), 23 ± 41. Neal, L. (1997). Virtual classrooms and communities. Paper presented at ACM Group 97, Phoenix, AZ, published by Association for Computing Machinery. Ravitz, J. (1997). An ISD model for building online communities. Furthering the dialog. Paper presented at National Convention of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology. Albuquerque, NM. Resmer, M. (1998). Internet architectures for learning. IEEE Computer, 105 ± 106. Riddle, M. D., Nott, N. W., & Pearce, J. M. (1996). Online learning environments for teaching science. [Online] http://www.science.unimelb.edu.au/SMTU/edmedia96.html. Scigliano, J., Levin, J., & Horne, G. (1996). Using HTML for organizing student projects through the internet. Technological Horizons in Education ( T.H.E. Journal), 51 ± 56. Shotsberger, P. G. (1997). Emerging roles for instructors and learners in the Web-based instruction classroom. In B. Kahn (Ed.), Web-based instruction ( pp. 101±106). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications. Terrell, S. (1997). Assessment in distance education: A case study. FASCD Policy Review, 5(2), 14 ± 19.
Nova Southeastern University, Ft. Lauderdale, FL, USA
A steady increase in the development and use of online instructional delivery systems in higher education institutions is expected to occur over the next few years. Online learning environments (OLEs) will emerge to provide comprehensive support for the process of learning and instruction. Currently, educators and administrators are seeking guidance for conceptualizing and implementing OLEs. A framework is needed to represent the essential aspects of OLE development and use, and to address the complex nature of OLEs. This paper offers a definition for OLEs. Also, a framework is presented to support a ``directed'' approach to OLEs that provides a basis for planning, designing, implementing and evaluating OLEs, and for online courses contained within OLEs. The elements of the framework for DIRECTED OLEs, Delivery, Interaction, Resources, Evaluation, Culture, Technology, Education, and Design, are defined and issues concerning the elements are presented.
Introduction Within a few short years the Internet has sparked the rapid growth of online learning delivery systems used to form ``cyberschools,'' ``online campuses,'' and ``electronic classrooms.'' This movement has driven higher education institutions in particular to the World Wide Web to attract students to institutions by offering online courses and degree programs. Online instruction is typically delivered via dedicated Web-based hypertext systems used to store a variety of relevant course information such as syllabi, examples of student work, class notes, announcements, tutorials, and other information. Such practice is quickly becoming a common model for online instruction in an attempt to give learners and faculty convenient access to information that has been traditionally imparted through face-to-face contact. Along this theme, online instruction as a delivery paradigm is beginning to be viewed as an alternative or supplement to traditional classroom instruction for occasions when physical classroom space may be limited (Dringus & Terrell, 1996). Also, online instruction is being recognized as a convenient method by which adult learners can pursue their educational goals without disengagement from job commitments or imposing on learners extensive travel to campus Direct all correspondence to: Dr. Laurie P. Dringus, Nova Southeastern University, School of Computer and Information Sciences, P.O. Box 290600, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33329-0600. E-mail: [email protected] The Internet and Higher Education 2(1): 55 ± 67 Copyright D 1999 Elsevier Science Inc.
ISSN: 1096-7516 All rights of reproduction in any form reserved.
55
56
DRINGUS AND TERRELL
facilities (Dringus & Terrell, 1996; Scigliano, Levin, & Horne, 1996; Benyon, Stone, & Woodroffe, 1997). A steady increase of online instruction is expected to occur along with the emergence of online learning environments (OLEs) that will provide comprehensive support for the process of learning and instruction. An OLE is the foundation upon which an effective learning environment is conveyed to learners, faculty, and other stakeholders. The foundation of an OLE rests on the notion of providing an environment that can be reached at anytime and from any location, and is conducive to supporting quality academic learning and communication activities. Layered within OLEs are online courses and activities facilitated by an integration of a variety of appropriate instructional and communication technology tools. Online courses become components of a distinct, legitimate, comprehensive and pedagogically meaningful learning environment (Dringus & Terrell, 1998). Given foreseeable trends in this early era of online instruction, developing a comprehensive definition for OLEs is important. In addition, it is important to identify the essential elements that comprise OLEs as well as consider the various issues that pertain to OLE development and use. It is important also to evaluate how OLEs may influence the overall process of online learning and instruction. In this paper, the authors provide a definition for OLEs and a framework that serves as a guide for recognizing several key elements of OLEs. The issues are explored in a framework, one that supports a ``directed'' approach to OLEs. The elements of the framework for DIRECTED OLEs, Delivery, Interaction, Resources, Evaluation, Culture, Technology, Education, and Design, are defined and issues concerning the elements are presented. The DIRECTED framework provides a basis for planning, designing, implementing and evaluating OLEs and for online courses contained within OLEs. The framework is intended to be used with existing instructional systems delivery models. The main objective of this article is to provide breadth about the range of foundational issues connected with OLEs.
Related Background It is anticipated that OLEs will be used to augment traditional classroom pedagogic practices and to provide extensibility to the use of educational institution-based Web sites (Dringus, 1995a; Terrell, 1997). While educators are anxious to test the waters of online instruction, often the transition occurs with limited understanding of the unique aspects that exist in the online environment that may be different from the traditional classroom environment. As an example, the literature has cited case studies and experiences about the new roles of faculty and learners that emerge in computer-mediated courses (Harasim, Hiltz, Teles, & Turoff, 1995; Neal, 1997, Shotsberger, 1997; McLellan, 1998). In addition, some online instruction practices may not be scalable from what has been practiced in the traditional classroom paradigm. Some reported problems involving scale of delivery include, for example, time management of learners and faculty (Harasim et al., 1995; Collis & Remmers, 1997), large class sizes (Harasim et al., 1995), courses that are largely lecture-based (Harasim et al., 1995), the use of traditional learning metaphors in online classrooms (Harasim, Calvert, & Groeneboer, 1997) and the degree to which
FRAMEWORK FOR DIRECTED OLES
57
online learners are expected to interface with instructors and collaborate with peers (McLellan, 1998). These problem areas indicate that much is unknown about online instruction as a delivery paradigm. The literature has provided limited theory or conceptual foundation for distance education (Marsden, 1996), for technology-enhanced student-centered learning environments (Hannafin & Land, 1997), or for online instruction in particular. Marsden noted that distance education as a field acks conceptual coherence, due to general ad hoc organization and mismanagement of distance education efforts and ill-defined problems that are difficult to control. A lack of conceptual coherence can be associated with online instruction as well. Educators who are new to online instruction are often conceptualizing what online instruction is while they are implementing their courses. Without readily available literature devoted to theory and conceptual foundations for online instruction, faculty and learners tend to rely on information that is largely limited to prescriptive discussions about the current use and advantages of online instruction. The limited scope of available information lacks depth and breadth when describing online instruction as a delivery paradigm. The result of a lack of theory or conceptual basis for online instruction may translate to less than optimal online learning experience for learners and faculty, particularly during trial and error stages of implementation. Associated with the lack of conceptual coherence of the online instruction paradigm is the issue of what defines an OLE and how an OLE can be recognized. Generally, online courses have been perceived as ``electronic versions'' of traditional classroom courses taught face-to-face in a physical meeting space (Marsden, 1996). In the traditional classroom, the ``environment'' is recognized by the presence of the campus consisting of buildings and walls. Courses are self-contained activities perceived to occur within a structure of buildings and behind walls. What distinguishes an OLE apart from a physical structure? What is the structure of an OLE besides the obvious property of virtuality? Single online courses often do not support the perception of a distinct learning environment. The notion of presence is missing in view of campus and/or other educational entities (e.g., lecture halls, auditoriums, study rooms, etc.) that are recognizable from the traditional metaphors of learning and instruction. Therefore, it remains unclear about what defines an OLE and how an OLE can be recognized as a distinct entity. Some authors have offered descriptions of components and foundations for distance education systems. Moore and Kearsley (1996) described a systems approach to recognize the interacting and interdependent set of components that define a distance education system. These components included the variety of processes that contain teaching, learning, communications and management in a distance education environment. The authors presented a model of five components for distance education: sources, design, delivery, interaction and the learning environment. These components also contained subsystems that include issues of instructional design. Similarly, Hannafin and Land (1997) described five foundations for a technology-enhanced student-centered learning environment: psychological, pedagogical, technological, cultural and pragmatic. Hannafin and Land identified foundations and underlying assumptions common across student-centered designs. Computer-mediated learning environments were identified and included as an example of a student-centered design.
58
DRINGUS AND TERRELL
A framework is needed also to represent the essential aspects of the development and use of OLEs. Moore and Kearsley's (1996) systems approach is a start toward considering essential components for developing distance education programs, but not OLE development specifically. Hannafin and Land (1997) proposed the need for student-centered learning systems that encourage divergent reasoning, problem solving and critical thinking in learning activities. They presented a generic model that could be supported by a variety of technology systems, including computer-mediated learning environments. Dringus and Terrell (1996; 1998) specifically discussed the need for a conceptual framework for the development and use of an OLE. They addressed the need for a framework that first must support learning and teaching styles of learners and faculty, respectively, and meet the technical and instructional challenges of online instructional delivery. A successful framework for OLEs requires several elements to be infused into the instructional delivery systems lifecycle. The elements of the proposed framework for DIRECTED OLEs (Delivery, Interaction, Resources, Evaluation, Culture, Technology, Education and Design) are highly conceptual in nature. Conceptual as they are, the elements also need to be conveyed through the interface and through various actions of stakeholders (i.e., faculty, administrators, staff and learners) to produce a comprehensive learning and communication environment. Before fully exploring the framework for DIRECTED OLEs, a definition of an OLE is offered. Defining an OLE We define an OLE as a distinct, pedagogically meaningful and comprehensive online learning environment by which learners and faculty can participate in the learning and instructional process at anytime and any place. OLEs manifest a variety of technical tools that support instructional delivery and communication in online formats. In addition, dynamic delivery structures are embedded to enhance the instructional, learning and communication processes taking place. This definition supports the need for a composite view of an OLE. To explore the definition, distinguishing some primary differences between online courses and OLEs is important. Currently, online courses can be distinguished by the primary use of a variety of technology components or tools. Technology components or tools may include the use of Web-based hypertext menus to post course syllabi and other information. Electronic communication tools may be used to support electronic classroom meetings and activities through asynchronous and synchronous communication (e.g., E-mail, bulletin boards, chat software, etc.). Other technology components or tools may include the use of electronic libraries and research database systems and online tours of external sources of information (e.g., Internet-based businesses, government, educational sites, etc.). Online courses emerge from the integration and use of one or more of these technology components or tools. Online courses are self-contained course presentations designed by individual instructors who package typical course material (for example, course syllabi, assignments and announcements) in a prearranged computer-mediated format. When technology components or tools are used separately or in combination, support for online instruction is possible. However, the presence of technology components or tools alone does not necessarily result in having established an effective OLE. The strategy for supporting self-contained online courses emphasizes the role of independent
FRAMEWORK FOR DIRECTED OLES
59
or non-directed environments that can stand apart from or exist outside the learning system or environment at large. However, online courses are often designed without a comprehensive objective to achieve the design of a distinct and standalone learning environment for online instruction (Dringus & Terrell, 1996). Under such condition, the effectiveness of online learning could be viewed as less than optimal (Dringus & Terrell, 1998), particularly when given evidence of ad hoc organization (Marsden, 1996) and extemporaneous management of online courses. Like typical online course components described above, OLEs manifest a variety of technical tools that support instructional delivery and communication in online formats. Yet, OLEs have an extended purpose of offering learners and faculty the ability to focus on the educational process at large, by providing dynamic delivery structures that promote an effective learning environment beyond the mere presence of an online course presentation. Dynamic delivery structures are contained within the OLE proper. Examples of delivery structures may include an extensive set of metaphors that visually and conceptually match more traditional resources that reflect a physical campus such as a library, study hall, student discussion hall, orientation room, research lab and help center (Dringus & Terrell, 1998). Other examples of delivery structures may include information resources, communication, collaborative activities, and other dynamics that learners may want to reach, participate in, or use (Dringus, 1995b). Resmer (1998) described the need for Internet architectures for learning in which there are ``readily accessible instructional objects that can be easily located, aggregated, and customized'' ( p. 105) in learning environments. The Instructional Management Systems (IMS) project, sponsored by EDUCAUSE, is aimed to promote open specifications for facilitating online activities such as locating and using educational content, tracking learner progress, reporting learner performance, and exchanging student records between administrative systems (Resmer, 1998). The considerations of the IMS project are similar to what we describe in this article as dynamic delivery structures in an OLE. From the OLE, prearranged delivery structures can be drawn to be used in self-contained online courses as needed. Overall, the delivery structures integrated in the OLE are there to promote a deeper sense of awareness that an online campus exists. Additionally, OLEs support a learner-centered paradigm that focuses on learners as active players in the learning process. OLEs enable learners to become the center of the learning experience with readily available support of peers, faculty and administration. The process of learning and communication in OLEs can occur anytime and from any location. The idea of classroom shifts an emphasis from perceiving the traditional physical environment as a sole location for learning to occur, to an emphasis toward perceiving a communication-enriched computing environment that encompasses the world of information at large. The Framework for DIRECTED OLEs By identifying differences between online courses and OLEs, a definition of an OLE has been proposed. Next, a framework for OLEs is needed to bring together online courses in a learner-centered environment. The motivation for the framework is derived from the recognition that the use of online communication and instructional tools alone (such as Web pages, E-mail, conference chat rooms, electronic blackboards, etc.) does not necessarily lead to a perception of learners and faculty that a distinct OLE exists that
60
DRINGUS AND TERRELL
Figure 1.
Framework for DIRECTED OLEs
supports learning and communication in an online course. In addition, emulating the traditional classroom as an instructional paradigm in online form may be difficult to achieve. We view the problem as a lack of a systematic approach to conceptualizing and implementing OLEs as unique and distinct learning environments. One way to approach the problem is to recognize that online instruction without careful attention to the broader OLE concepts (such as the elements of the DIRECTED framework), results in a non-directed approach. It was mentioned earlier, in connection with online courses, that the non-directed approach is evident when there is a lack of objective to achieve an effective design of a distinct and standalone learning environment for online instruction. Non-directed OLEs lack specific purpose and consistency as they only promote online courses as independent products of individual faculty member's efforts. Conversely, the directed approach takes on the overall goal of OLE Ð to offer a conceptual frame of several elements that form an effective and a distinct OLE. The notion of direction is offered to explore a variety of learning and/or instructional approaches that would fit well into online learning scenarios. Direction can imply negative connotations in approach as well. For example, an emphasis on structure may be overly limiting to offer choices about implementations. Instead, we offer the notion of direction, and the directed approach in particular, as a broad perspective to bring to the surface the many issues that port into successful OLEs.
FRAMEWORK FOR DIRECTED OLES
61
Table 1. The Framework for DIRECTED OLEs: The Elements and their Definitions Element
Definition
Delivery
A process of presenting and maintaining an Online Learning Environment. Delivery consists of a continuum of instructional, managerial, and technical challenges that must be met to provide learners and faculty with a clear perception of the OLE structure or design and the conceptual mapping or elements of the OLE. The embodiment of meaningful communication and collaboration between faculty and learners, with appropriate choices of communication modes and online tools that are best suited to match the learning and teaching styles of learners and faculty, respectively. Human, information, learning, and technical dimensions that bring the OLE to life. Human resources include faculty, administrative and technical staff, and learners. Information and learning resources include internal and external information or activities that are presented, accessed, utilized or performed. Technical resources include computer-mediated tools that are support mechanisms for human communication and learning activity in OLEs. An iterative process for assessing the efficacy and validity of OLEs. Evaluation should take place from the conceptual stage of OLE development through the measurement of learning outcomes of an online course. Accurate and ongoing assessments of the learner, the instructional process, the course content, and the OLE as an entity, will include a combination of formative and summative evaluations for each of these components and their effectiveness as a unit. Identifying the new roles that learners and faculty take on in OLEs, as well as an understanding of a shift toward a learner-centered paradigm. A ``culture'' emerges in OLEs that supports the notion that learners and faculty are resources for each other, and that learners interface with the world of information at large. Robust and activity-oriented mechanisms and tools that are interfaced by the computer-mediated environment. Computing requirements must be established and will vary depending on the scale to which online learning and communication is to be offered. Technology training and support need to be provided to OLE stakeholders. OLE technology tools provide the means to faculty and learners to participate in learning and communication activities without time or place constraints. OLE technology tools enable the learning and instructional process to seamlessly flow online. The embodiment of learning and instructional processes directed toward supporting a learner-centered paradigm. Pedagogically meaningful OLEs support active learning and instructional processes with the appropriate choice and implementation of learner-centered metaphors that match specific communication and learning objectives and tasks. Included in the continuum of delivery challenges are critical areas of concern for design: instructional methods and online delivery methods, conceptual design and learning modality issues, delivery logistics for faculty and staff, management of OLE activities and services, and technical tools and communication mechanisms to support OLE activities and services.
Interaction Resources
Evaluation
Culture
Technology
Education
Design
The framework for DIRECTED OLEs is shown in Fig. 1. The proposed framework is intended to identify several key elements that, when fully integrated, support an effective online learner-centered paradigm. Fig. 1 presents a circle at which the OLE is the core of the framework. The OLE is essentially formed through successful integration of the elements. On the outer layer of the framework, the elements are presented as disparate and unique categories that also interact with other elements. The connecting line of each element to the inner circle indicates the total integration of the elements that represent the OLE proper. Through integration of the elements, the framework for DIRECTED OLEs distills and defines the formation of the core, which is the OLE itself. As noted in the introduction, the framework serves as a guide for recognizing several key elements of OLEs. The DIRECTED framework supports an iterative process of planning, designing, implementing and evaluating OLEs, and for online courses contained within OLEs. The framework itself is not an instructional delivery systems model, but is
62
DRINGUS AND TERRELL
intended to be used with existing instructional delivery systems models. The main objective of the framework is to bring visibility to and organize the breadth of major foundational aspects of OLEs. The eight elements are briefly introduced in this section and are more formally defined in Table 1. Delivery deals with the process of presenting and maintaining an OLE. Interaction focuses on the issues of enabling communication and interaction among faculty, learners and other external information providers. The Resources element addresses issues of enabling information, technical, administrative, faculty and learner support in OLEs. Evaluation focuses on issues about evaluating learner performance, course content outcomes in OLEs, and assessing the validity of OLEs. Culture deals with the social structure of the online classroom and the unique culture that emerges from the environment and activity within OLEs. Technology centers on issues of providing quality communication and instructional tools and supporting synchronous and asynchronous learning modes in OLEs. Education involves a range of essential pedagogical issues that pertain to supporting the learning and instructional process in OLEs. Design concentrates on issues involved with designing components for online instruction and the visual and functional composition of OLEs. For an OLE to be effective, there must be an integration of instructional, managerial and technical challenges that must be addressed in each element from the onset of planning for an OLE through the ongoing use of an OLE. Also, the elements of the framework for DIRECTED OLEs encompass the essential issues that go into the conceptualization, planning, design, implementation and evaluation process of OLEs, along with the considerations of culture, communication tools, interactions, instructional delivery, learning activities, technology components, pedagogy and resources that must be explored to offer sound online instruction. These elements taken separately are unique and encompass their own characteristics. Taken together the elements form a distinct and comprehensive OLE. Through integration, the elements are ``directed'' toward achieving an effective OLE. Table 1 presents the elements of the DIRECTED framework and definitions for each element. The definitions are intended to capture characteristics of each element. The Integration of the DIRECTED OLE Elements The elements and their issues inevitably integrate with other DIRECTED OLE elements. Integration is complex and requires some thoughtful attention to use the framework as a guide for the development and use of OLEs. A summary of how the elements are integrated or related is offered here. For example, ill-made decisions could result from the purchase of collaborative online communication tools (Technology) if there is not a clear understanding of how effectively the tools would support communication in a learning context between faculty and students (Interaction and Education). Likewise, some early challenges must be met before subsequent challenges can be contended with. For example, to what extent would online instruction be used to deliver a course or courses (Delivery)? From that question arises a range of issues to be explored. For example, what skills are needed by faculty to prepare and deliver online courses effectively (Resources)? Also, logistics must be identified and communicated for faculty and staff to manage the online learning process. Such logistics may include class size, faculty loads, online
FRAMEWORK FOR DIRECTED OLES
63
services, academic policies, and presentation of online information and materials (Delivery and Education). In addition, decisions must be made related to integrating the best choice online tools that match the learning activity (Interaction, Technology and Design). The Design and Delivery elements are related to how the design and composition of the OLE will convey to learners and faculty a sense of ongoing learning activity. Design and Delivery issues also involve how an OLE should be presented. In addition, the Design, Delivery, Technology and Interaction elements are related to issues that address the appropriate mix of technology and human intervention needed to convey the effectiveness of an OLE. In addition, the Education and Culture elements address issues of changes of philosophy toward pedagogy in online settings. The Interaction and Culture elements address issues related to recognizing learner and faculty communication protocols in OLEs. The Resources and Technology elements share issues related to determining technical resources needed, including an Evaluation of requirements, costs, management resources, etc. The Culture, Education and Resources elements share issues regarding changes in roles and responsibilities of stakeholders in OLEs. There is also overlap of Education issues with issues that are relevant to the instructional challenges of Delivery. The Evaluation element involves issues that permeate across all other elements in that the entire system (learner, instructor, curricular material, instructional methods, technology use, design and delivery system, etc.) should be assessed and reviewed as an integral part of the development of an effective OLE. Each element involves several issues that lead to either formative or summative evaluation of the issues. A Preview of Issues Concerning the Elements Describing the essentials of each element in detail is beyond the scope of this overview article. However, definitions alone (Table 1) do not show the range of issues that spans each element. Potential research questions and issues that may be explored in the future for each element are given in this section. Future articles discussing the DIRECTED framework should explore, in-depth, the elements and those issues subsumed under the elements. For example, a good deal of effort made by planning committees is geared toward Delivery issues. How should an OLE be presented? What is an OLE for an institution's specific purpose? What is the appropriate mix of technology and human intervention needed? Distinguishing differences between delivering information and delivering learning is also important (Bork & Britton, 1998). Future exploration is needed to provide intervention strategies for an extensive range of instructional, managerial and technical challenges that span the Delivery element. One example of an intervention strategy was noted by Cravener (1998) in which integrated distributed learning environments (IDLEs) are being explored to support interactive learning on the Web. Interaction is an element that is not well understood within the confines of online environments because there is a limited understanding of essential dimensions of interaction and how the dimensions come into play in online settings. For example, one dimension of interaction is feedback. Naidu (1994) reported that feedback in distance learning settings is essential to the learning process. Yet, the extent to which this component is understood has not been researched in online courses or online settings. Further, Interaction as an element must be understood as to appropriate choices of
64
DRINGUS AND TERRELL
communication modes such as asynchronous and synchronous interaction (Harasim et al., 1995), and the online tools that are best suited to match the learning and teaching styles of learners and faculty. Berge (1999) recommended that we distinguish differences between the necessity for students to interact with course content cognitively (intrapersonal interaction) and the importance of students interacting with one another and their instructors about content (interpersonal interaction). In addition, as OLEs steadily emerge, recognizing interaction within its own context as a critical construct of the online experience is important. Initiatives directed toward the development of OLEs must include a substantial analysis and review of a variety of Resources needed to produce an OLE (Dringus, 1999). Attention is often given to technical resources. Other resources include human resources, information resources and learning resources. Each of these ``resources'' categories contain their own unique set of requirements and considerations. However, each ``resources'' category cannot be viewed only within its own structure. Resources-based decisions account for influences or consequences of decisions connected to and balanced among the variety of resources being considered. The interplay of resources may be evaluated as to the support and infrastructure needed to provide a functional and efficient OLE. OLEs are anticipated to assume a more prominent role as a medium for instruction in the future. Teaching methodologies applied to OLEs will call for new and different ways of assessing learners, instructional methods, and the instructional process as a whole (Ravitz, 1997; Terrell, 1997). Not to adequately evaluate these components in OLEs could result in the risk of not ensuring the highest degree of learning effectiveness possible in online settings. The Evaluation element needs to be explored more fully in this context. The Culture element needs to be more fully explored as to comprehending the roles that learners and faculty assume for a learner-centered paradigm (Barr & Tagg, 1995) in online settings. Comprehending a culture that emerges from an acceptance of a learning paradigm is essential to expand the scope of learning activities in OLEs that have been historically classroom or laboratory managed. Future research is needed in this context. One of the fastest areas of Internet growth is the application of online learning delivery systems. The Technology element addresses issues associated with determining what online learning technologies enable faculty and designers the ability to create a customized education system that also facilitates ease of use for both faculty and learners. The Technology element also addresses the need to provide embedded tools to support a variety of structured or unstructured online activities. A structured set of online tools to expand course content in OLEs is essential to the success of online degree programs. The technical environment and computing platform must support a variety of academic disciplines and courseware formats. Robust tools need to be developed to enable learning activities that are collaborative and knowledge building oriented. Efficient administrative tools are needed to facilitate the efficient management and maintenance of the OLE. Computing requirements and policies for use must be established (Riddle, Nott, & Pearce, 1996). The Education element is broadly defined as the embodiment of learning and instructional processes directed toward supporting a learner-centered paradigm. Essentially, the learner-centered paradigm requires a shift in thinking of all stakeholders Ð learners, instructors and administrators Ð from one of providing instruction to one of producing learning (Barr & Tagg, 1995). This philosophy can then be connected to the
FRAMEWORK FOR DIRECTED OLES
65
development of pedagogically meaningful OLEs. The issues involved with implementing and achieving this paradigm are extensive. Research is needed to learn more about the critical challenges that faculty and learners must contend with, along with strategies for action that faculty and learners need to enable instruction and learning in OLEs. Kroder, Suess, and Sachs (1998) recommended that faculty are provided sufficient lead, preparation time and training to develop an online course. They also discussed the importance of providing ongoing training to learners and faculty to use online tools appropriately. There are many issues associated with the Education element. It may be necessary that the Education element includes its own iterative development lifecycle process to work through the many stages of development and use of OLEs from the variety of instructional, pedagogical and learning perspectives involved. The Design element involves issues related to the ways in which technology use should be structured in visual and interactive ways to optimize learning in an OLE. This element involves providing interactive mechanisms for learners to connect to and to complete a variety of specific tasks such as conducting research, communicating with others, locating information, and other tasks (Dringus & Terrell, 1998; Resmer, 1998). Design issues also involve attention to the resources Ð human, technical, information and learning resources Ð needed to create a visual and coherent OLE. Interface design and human±computer interaction issues need to be explored more fully in context of the Design element. Conclusion The framework for DIRECTED OLEs is introduced as a guide that can be used to distill and define the essential foundational aspects involved in achieving a comprehensive and an effective OLE. The eight disparate elements contain several categories of issues that need to be addressed, as appropriate, through an iterative development lifecycle. The OLE development lifecycle involves the stages of planning, design, implementation and evaluation. Through this iterative process, when several key elements are examined and integrated to form an OLE, the possibility increases to support a learner-centered paradigm in an online format. The authors introduce the need for a more formal approach to conceptualizing and implementing OLEs as distinct learning environments. The literature is scant in providing formal models or frameworks for the development and use of OLEs. The context of this article is mainly geared toward providing a framework that can be used to begin the process of extracting issues and concerns that need to be organized and contained within a comprehensive structure. The framework for DIRECTED OLEs is a guide educators could use to recognize and address the scope of complex concerns that are significant to the process of online instructional delivery. In addition, the authors provide a definition for an OLE, a definition for each element of the DIRECTED framework, and a summary of how elements are integrated. An OLE is defined in this article by describing the elements of the framework for DIRECTED OLEs, yet there is much work to be done to examine each element as a unique component that interacts with other elements. The DIRECTED approach is proposed to provide context to the need for having a ``directed'' orientation to promote careful attention to critical OLE concepts and issues. Marsden (1996) noted that learning
66
DRINGUS AND TERRELL
to teach at a distance usually develops in an ad hoc manner. Overall, the non-directed approach is viewed as an ad hoc orientation to online course or OLE development and delivery. In this article, the authors look to promote online learning by stating that a directed approach is a frame of reference from which the design of a distinct and stand-alone learning environment for online instruction can be achieved. The framework for DIRECTED OLEs is offered to give educators a systematic approach to conceptualizing and implementing OLEs; one that requires thoughtful attention to issues of pedagogy, culture, technology, resources, etc., throughout an iterative development lifecycle. Overall, the framework for DIRECTED OLEs advocates the need for structure over ad hoc planning and implementation of online courses or OLEs. An extensive exploration of the elements is needed to more fully comprehend how the core of online instruction, the OLE, affords the engagement of quality instruction and communication in a computer-mediated format. Taken separately the elements are unique and encompass their own characteristics. While all elements are unique, they require integration with each other to form an effective OLE. However, research is needed to more fully explore each element. Presently, the building blocks for developing and implementing effective OLEs are sketchy. It is possible that OLEs are being developed on the basis of ad hoc decisions or convenience of availability of technology tools. Instead, sound theory and formal methods should be followed to plan and implement OLEs. Future development is needed of models or frameworks that can be used to support the development of OLEs. In conjunction, research is needed to study quality and effectiveness of what is being carried out in OLEs. References Barr, R., & Tagg, J. (1995). From teaching to learning Ð a new paradigm for undergraduate education. Change, 13 ± 25. Benyon, D., Stone, D., & Woodroffe, M. (1997). Experience with developing multimedia courseware for the World Wide Web: The need for better tools and clear pedagogy. International Journal of Human±Computer Studies, 47(1). Available at http://ijhcs.open.ac.uk/benyon/benyon-nf.html. Berge, Z. L. (1999). Interaction in post-secondary web-based learning. Educational Technology, 5 ± 11. Bork, A., & Britton, D. R. (1998). The web is not suitable for learning. IEEE Computer, 115 ± 116. Collis, B., & Remmers, E. (1997). The world wide web in education: Issues related to cross-cultural communication and interaction. In B. Kahn (Ed.), Web-based instruction ( pp. 85 ± 92). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications. Cravener, P. (1998). Education on the web: a rejoinder. IEEE Computer, 107 ± 108. Dringus, L. P. (1995a). Interface issues associated with using the Internet as a link to online courses. Journal of Interactive Instruction Development, 8(2), 16 ± 20. Dringus, L. P. (1995b). An interactive usability evaluation procedure for interactive online courses. Journal of Interactive Instruction Development, 7(4), 10 ± 14. Dringus, L. (1999). Connecting resources in online learning environments. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration. [Online] http://www.westga.edu/ ~ distance/. Dringus, L., & Terrell, S. (1996). Technical and instructional challenges of delivering online distance learning courses. Paper presented at the International Multimedia 96 Conference (SALT), Arlington, VA. Dringus, L., & Terrell, S. (1998). Awareness as a metaphor in online learning environments. Paper presented at the International Conference on Technology and Education (ICTE), March 8 ± 11, 1998. Santa Fe, New Mexico. Hannafin, M. J., & Land, S. M. (1997). The foundations and assumptions of technology-enhanced student-centered learning environments. Instructional Science, 25, 167 ± 202. Harasim, L., Hiltz, S. R., Teles, L., & Turoff, M. (1995). Learning networks. A field guide to teaching and learning online. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
FRAMEWORK FOR DIRECTED OLES
67
Harasim, L., Calvert, T., & Groeneboer, C. (1997). Virtual U: A Web-based system to support collaborative learning. In B. Kahn (Ed.), Web-based instruction149±158 ( pp. 149±158). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications. Kroder, S. L., Suess, J., & Sachs, D. (1998). Lessons in launching Web-based courses. Technological Horizons in Education (T.H.E. Journal), 66 ± 69. Marsden, R. (1996). Time, space, and distance education. Distance Education, 17(1), 222 ± 246. McLellan, H. (1998). The internet as a virtual learning community. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 9(2), 92 ± 112. Moore, M. G., & Kearsley, G. (1996). Distance education: A systems view. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Naidu, S. (1994). Applying learning and instructional strategies in open learning. Distance Education, 15(1), 23 ± 41. Neal, L. (1997). Virtual classrooms and communities. Paper presented at ACM Group 97, Phoenix, AZ, published by Association for Computing Machinery. Ravitz, J. (1997). An ISD model for building online communities. Furthering the dialog. Paper presented at National Convention of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology. Albuquerque, NM. Resmer, M. (1998). Internet architectures for learning. IEEE Computer, 105 ± 106. Riddle, M. D., Nott, N. W., & Pearce, J. M. (1996). Online learning environments for teaching science. [Online] http://www.science.unimelb.edu.au/SMTU/edmedia96.html. Scigliano, J., Levin, J., & Horne, G. (1996). Using HTML for organizing student projects through the internet. Technological Horizons in Education ( T.H.E. Journal), 51 ± 56. Shotsberger, P. G. (1997). Emerging roles for instructors and learners in the Web-based instruction classroom. In B. Kahn (Ed.), Web-based instruction ( pp. 101±106). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications. Terrell, S. (1997). Assessment in distance education: A case study. FASCD Policy Review, 5(2), 14 ± 19.