A DISTANCE EDUCATION INFRASTRUCTURE
by Lucy C. Morse, Ph.D. and Barbara Truman

MC Journal: The Journal of Academic Media Librarianship, v4#1, Summer 1996:10-24.


INTRODUCTION

Within the state of Florida current resources for education are
insufficient to meet the projected needs of current and potential
learners.  In 1995 the Florida Department of Education released the
following statistics:  between 1985 and 1990, headcount enrollment within
the State University System increased by twenty percent, and by
forty-five percent in the Community College System.  The projected 
growth in the number of high school graduates from 1990 to 2000 is 
thirty-five percent.  In addition to the "typical" college age student
increase, both minority and non-minority, there is an increased demand
for higher education, lifelong professional and vocational continuing 
education, and personal development from the adult population.  
This latter group often includes students that have not obtained a
higher education degree because of cultural and economic
barriers and are often geographically bound by job and family. 

To address these needs Florida is exploring the use of distance learning
technology.  As a part of this process the Florida State University System
funded five demonstration projects to explore the options of distance
learning within the state.  In February 1995, the Central Florida
Consortium of Higher Education's proposal for a Distance Learning
Demonstration Project (DLDP) was funded.

The Central Florida Consortium of Higher Education, Inc. (CFCHE), a
non-profit corporation in Florida, was established in 1988 with the six
community colleges of the University of Central Florida (UCF) service
area, which are:  Brevard, Central Florida, Daytona Beach, Lake-Sumter,
Seminole and Valencia, together with UCF as members.  These Central

*Page 10*

Florida institutions serve eleven of the sixty-seven counties of the
state.  The purpose of the organization is to forge strong articulation
activities among the institutions and to develop collaborative efforts to
improve undergraduate education.  Without this partnership, effective
systemic long-lasting improvements in undergraduate education within
Central Florida are unlikely. 

Changes in the undergraduate program must be systemic rather than local
because 70 percent of the upper division UCF students begin their
postsecondary education in the local community colleges.  Although
geography ultimately will not be a factor in distance learning, the
benefits of working with the CFCHE institutions at this early stage is
significant for implementation of a distance learning infrastructure that
can be disseminated throughout the state and the country. 


BACKGROUND

Though no ideal model of distance education exists, several are innovative
for very different reasons.  Philosophical approaches to distance
education differ.  Some researchers and practitioners feel that to be
successful, distance education must replicate face to face classroom
interaction.  Others assert that learner characteristics diminish the need
for real-time interaction.  The Open model at the British Open University
has teachers and support staff located at a central site without
classrooms.  Students determine where and when they learn (Thach 1994,
12).  In direct contrast is Iowa's fully interactive two-way video,
two-way audio network. 

*Page 11*

In 1987 the Iowa legislature approved a plan for the Iowa Communications
Network connecting the state with a high-speed, two-way interactive, fiber
optic network for voice, video and data communications.  Part One of the
plan connected the state's public television stations, three public
universities and fifteen community colleges;  Part Two connected at least one
site within the state's ninety-nine counties.  Now under construction Part
Three will connect four hundred schools, libraries, armories,
hospitals and area educational agencies.  This 1987 network was used
in the Iowa Distance Education Alliance, Iowa's Star Schools project
(K-12) from the US Department of Education, to encourage improved
instruction in various subject areas and to reach out to under served 
populations using telecommunications (Simonsen and Schlosser 1995, 14). 

Trends in distance education include attention to multiculturalism,
humanities, and world affairs (Sherry 1996, 3).  Using the Internet for
e-mail and searching the World Wide Web are two ways to bring the global
village to the desktop at the learner's convenience.  Barker and Baker
(1995, 18) state that networked-focused learning is a result of the
exponential growth on the Internet of student-initiated data gathering and
interactive communication.  The authors project the possibility that
network-focused distance learning will one day eclipse the practice of
classroom-focused distance learning.  Other trends expressed by Twigg
(1994, 1-5) are the changing definition of learning, new learning
environments, and the new attention paid to the diverse learning styles. 

New skills must be learned by faculty to meet the needs of quality
distance education.  Sherry (1996, 13) cites Schlosser and Anderson's 1994
literature review for the Association for Educational Communications and

*Page 12*

Technology (AECT ) which identifies these distance learning teaching
skills as:  understanding the nature and philosophy of distance education;
identifying learner characteristics at distant sites; designing and
developing interactive courseware to suit each technology; adapting
teaching strategies to deliver instruction at a distance; training and
practice in the use of telecommunications systems; evaluating student
achievement, attitudes and perceptions at distant sites; and dealing with
copyright issues. 

Eight major areas of knowledge necessary to distance learning were
identified in the International Journal of Instructional Media: 
communication and feedback, promoting interaction between and among
learners, teamwork and collaboration, administrative and support
services, conducting learner needs assessments, distance learning
technology and its impact on learners, identifying learning styles, and
developing a systems perspective of thinking (Thach and Murphy 1994, 16). 
Barker and Baker (1995, 19) assert "Distance education instructors of
necessity must be master teachers."  They add that the key to success in
distance learning is the teacher.  Instructors must challenge the students
to use their higher thinking to research, problem solve, and inquire about
their own answers (Mizell 1994, 6). 

The structure for learner support systems within institutions must be
varied based upon the student clientele, available resources, leadership,
and imagination. If a coherent whole is not fashioned from discrete pieces
that fit together from the standpoint of the student, the system's
objective cannot be achieved (Sewart 1992, 6).  Thach and Murphy (1994,
13) cite the example of the network, which is thought to be the management
structure of the future, as appropriate for distance education with
faculty and staff usually centralized and students scattered in hubs. 

*Page 13*


METHODOLOGY

The Distance Learning Demonstration Project focuses on creating an
infrastructure system to support distance learning and instructional
enhancement, not on hardware or courses to be used.  The first building
block is the development of the program infrastructure to support the
life cycle of instructional enhancement and distance education.  The
infrastructure includes, but is not limited to:  training faculty,
establishing access for the learner, and, in the process, developing a
plan for marketing distance education and assessing the benefits of
distance education. 

As the first building block is developed, these questions need to be
considered by an institution before making a commitment to distance
education:  Is the institution interested in pursuing a distance education
path in addition to a traditional college student path?  Who is the target
audience?  What are the programs/disciplines that faculty and students
believe need a distance education option?  Is the purpose of distance
education to make the institution more accessible for the current students
or to attract new students? 


Process

Knowing the answers to the above questions enables the activities for
distance learning to then be integrated into one management system. The

*Page 14*

steps are:  
. Define program objectives 
. Allocate resources to each objective 
. Combine objectives and resources into program schedule 
. Execute the program 
. Monitor progress 
. Validate the results 
. Factor lessons learned into future program planning efforts. 
	
Understanding how to use technology in teaching, distance learning, and
creating effective distance learning tools for organizational use are
critical elements to the success of this process.  These tools need to be
defined, and institutions must then be trained on how to properly apply
them.  The program objectives that are established to define the
boundaries of the DLDP system are given below. 


Training Faculty

Course Development:  The purpose of these instructional resources for
educational technology is to produce a vehicle for change advocacy, to
create enthusiasm, and to energize faculty and staff about distance
learning and instructional technology.  The videos and support material
showcase local faculty members who have distinguished themselves as
innovators or exceptional users of these technologies. 

Faculty Development:  The faculty development team provides workshops
related to conducting distance education courses and instructional
enhancement within current classroom courses

*Page 15*

Instructional technologists:  The funded technologists on each campus
provide faculty workshops and individual instruction sessions in the
actual use of, (versus simply knowledge of), distance education and
instructional enhancement tools. Working in concert with the specific and
general needs of each campus, instructional technologists will deliver
appropriate instruction to support existing campus faculty educational
technology initiatives. 


Learner Support System: 

This advisory committee has examined systems and components of systems
that allow distance learning to successfully function in higher education. 
A workshop to brainstorm for solutions within student services was
sponsored by Sprint.

Since the DLDP is a collaborative effort within the CFCHE, allocating the
human resources to each objective has been an important focus.  The course
development, faculty development, and learner support components of the
project each have an advisory committee with equal representation from
each of the seven institutions.  These advisory committees meet on a
monthly schedule and facilitate communication, coordination, and direction
among all participants.  A management chart of the complex
collaboration has assisted with the understanding of the resource allocation. 

Each Advisory Committee has planned and agreed on specific tasks,
processes, deliverables, and schedules.  All of the schedules have been
aggregated into an overall Gantt chart.  As work progresses on each of the
components, the timelines are used to monitor progress.  Monthly meetings

*Page 16*

of the management team, which is composed of the team leaders of each of
the components, result in formative evaluations and suggest immediate and
future improvements to the system. 

Constant communications have reinforced all these activities.  The
communications have had three foci:  communications with each other on the
advisory committees, communications within each institution, and
communications outside the Consortium.  From the beginning, electronic
mail has been used for those with access to the Internet and faxes
have been sent to the rest.  This electronic list has been updated 
constantly as more people come on-line.  A web page
(http://pegasus.cc.ucf.edu/~cfche) has been es tablished with links to all
CFCHE institutions and with copies of notes of all DLDP advisory
committees. 

The DLDP approach allows institutions to build distance learning
capabilities in phases, with each phase building upon the past.  Steps are
included that allow for issues to be addressed and corrections made. 

In addition, it is important that not only is the academic portion of
distance learning developed, but that there is a continuous contact with
the technology of distance learning.  Trends in the distance learning
technologies also need to be addressed.  With this in mind the goals for
a Distance Learning system within the CFCHE for years one through four
are: 
	
. Year 1 -- DLDP:  Establish program infrastructure, and conduct
pilot projects
. Year 2 -- Refine components of project and conduct Distance
Learning demonstrations and training
. Year 3 -- Establish initial distance learning capability
. Year 4 -- Continue program growth and expansion

*Page 17*

A detailed yearly listing of the strategies for each of the program
objectives is presented as an addendum to this article. 

One reason for the success of the DLDP is that the CFCHE has a historical
record of working together.  The opportunity to build on the system that
has been established by this year's activities is here.  Distance
education is also here and if higher education institutions fail to stake
a claim in this world, they could lose students to other institutions and
for-profit organizations (DeLoughry 1995, A21). 

The physical universities, the traditional universities, will remain, but
distance education and computer technology are new tools to augment the
educational process (Schwartz 1995, 22-26).  Access to computer technology
alone will not improve education; technology is only an enabling tool
which teachers must be taught to use in innovative and effective ways. 

The design for the infrastructure system will be usable in any
organization or institution.  With only limited modification the same
structure and processes can be used in academic settings, hospitals,
government organizations, and corporate settings.  The definition of
these elements and the creation of this model are of real consequence and
represent the challenge to those who believe in distance learning.  The
opportunity for the development of corporate strategic partnering with
educational institutions is exceptional.  This union is the future of
education. 

*Page 18*

According to the visionary Stan Davis, "The megaindustry created by the
union of computers, communications, entertainment, media and publishing
will deliver education and learning in such new ways that it will
parallel, rival, and in some instances displace schools as the major
deliverer of learning." (Davis 1994, 65) 


CONCLUSION

Much has been accomplished during this year of the Demonstration Project. 
Using technology in the learning process is the beginning of use of the
technologies that will open the future to a broader educational paradigm,
a value-added education, and one in which education will be less formal
and more open to the general population.  Several lessons have been
learned as this system has been created.  They include:  the importance of
communication at all levels, the need for administrative support at all in
stitutions, the importance of making decisions collaboratively, and the
benefits that come from the sharing of ideas and resources. 

The seven institutions of the CFCHE have learned to work together as teams
toward the common goal of creating an infrastructure to support distance
learning and instructional enhancement.  The objectives for Year 1 are
being met and the framework for a successful Distance Learning System is
in place for future development. 

*Page 19*
	

REFERENCES

Barker, B. and M. Baker. 1995.  "Strategies to ensure interaction in
telecommunicated distance learning."  Paper presented to Teaching
strategies for distance learning, 11th Annual Conference on Teaching and
Learning.  Madison, Wisconsin. 17-23.

Davis, S. and J. Botkin. 1994.  The Monster Under the Bed.  New York:
Simon and Schuster. 

DeLoughry, T. J. 1995.  "Making connections."  The Chronicle of Higher
Education. December 8:A21. 

Mizell, A. 1994. Graduate education through telecommunications: the
computer and you. AECT National Convention, Nashville, Tennessee. 

Schwartz, R.A. 1995.  "The virtual university."  ASEE Prism.  5(4):22-26. 

Sewart, D. 1992. Student support systems in distance education. Paper
presented at the World Conference of the International Council for
Distance Education, Bangkok, Thailand. 

Sherry, L. 1996. "Issues in distance learning." International Journal of
Distance Education, 1(4):337-365.
http://www.cudenver.edu/public/education/edschool/issues.html

Simonsen, M. and C. Schlosser. 1995.  "More than fiber:  distance
education in Iowa." Techtrends. 12.

*Page 20* 

Thach, L. and K. Murphy. 1994. "Collaboration in distance education: from
local to international perspectives." American Journal of Distance
Education.  8(3):5-21. 

Twigg, C. 1994. "The need for a national learning infrastructure."  Educom
Review. 29:4-6.  http://www.educom.edu/program/nlii/keydocs/monograph.html


ADDENDUM

Year 1

Strategies addressing each of the program objectives for establishing the
program infrastructure are given below: 

Training of Faculty: 
. Present innovative and effective applications of technology-enhanced
instruction

. Encourage use of educational technology by faculty in higher
education institutions

. Provide insight and instruction regarding various modes of education
technology-in place-dependent environments (i.e., classrooms, open
computer labs) or extended learning settings (i.e., two-way
interactive teleclassrooms), and in time-and place-independent
environments using distance learning delivery systems  

. Assess Community College and UCF needs of Distance Learning and 
instructional enhancement

. Develop workshops as determined by the assessments and input
provided by the Advisory Committee  

. Develop appropriate workshops and individual training sessions  
. Training will be designed and delivered in a revolving manner,
considering the strengths of each individual instructional
technologist and participating campus and sharing same among CFCHE
member institutions

*Page 21*
  
. Develop personal technology profiles for interested faculty members
detailing a comprehensive plan for their successful, ongoing
integration of appropriate instructional enhancement and distance
education tools and techniques into their teaching practices

. Implement workshops and individual training sessions 


Learner Support: 

. Examine systems and components of systems that allow distance
learning to successfully function in higher education

. Investigate accreditation rules to see how Southern Association of
Colleges and Schools treats distance learning

. Review the literature for learner support models at other institutions  

. Develop and distribute a survey instrument to allow Consortium
members to record their institution's level of learner support
services and systems 

. Review and verify surveys of learner support systems at Consortium 
institutions  

. Investigate the areas of support services, which have been
identified as:  admissions, advising/counseling, bookstore, computer
services, financial aid, library, registration, and testing  

. Survey focus groups of students for their perception of the learner 
support systems  

. Begin to build a data base of distance learning "lessons learned" 
for application to the program 


Marketing: 

. Make presentations on the DLDP system
  
. Sponsor a workshop to brainstorm for solutions to provide
appropriate support services to learners/students that elect to access
post-secondary public institutions within Central Florida

*Page 22*
  
. Design a Framework for planning and delivering distance learning
courses and instructional enhancement -- Have one day, three days, or 
four days options
 
. Develop a marketing plan for the Distance Learning system that can
be used with community sponsors 

The objectives and strategies for marketing were not developed as
completely as for teaching and learning.  As time has progressed, this
deficiency has become more apparent and should be taken into consideration
to a greater degree at the onset of the process.


Years 2, 3, 4

These years will continue training faculty, establishing access for the
learner, developing the marketing plan, and evaluating the different
components with an emphasis each year on specific objectives.  Some of the
strategies during these years will be: 

. Survey learners/students for course needs via distance learning
 
. Establish which courses would be converted to distance learning
 
. Establish a reward system reflecting administrative support of 
distance education curriculum development
  
. Develop a conversion plan for existing course and develop new ones
  
. Determine who is the target audience for the instructional resources
and which delivery method is best suited to each group

. Determine the medium to long term effect of the faculty workshops
on the use of technology in the classroom  

. Evaluate the change in the support services at each of the CFCHE 
institutions following the Workshop 

. Factor lessons learned into future planning efforts  

. Evaluate the aggregated distance learning infrastructure 
	
*Page 23*

. Train faculty in the course conversion process
	
. Continue to encourage the use of educational technology by faculty 
at higher education institutions
  
. Establish quality standards for distance learning courses
  
. Continue to build databases of lessons learned
 
. Continue marketing the benefits of distance learning 



Dr. Lucy Morse is the Director of the Central Florida Consortium of
Higher Education, Inc.  She also serves as Principal Investigator and
Project Manager of the CFCHE Distance Learning Demonstration Project.
She earned her Ph.D. in Industrial Engineering at the University of
Central Florida and was a member of the Industrial Engineering faculty
prior to going to the National Science Foundation as a Program Manager
in the Engineering Directorate.

Barbara Truman has served as Webmaster of the Distance Learning
Demonstration project while completing her Master's degree in
Instructional Systems Technology at the University of Central Florida.
She was recently hired by UCF as a course developer for interactive
distance learning and she is enrolled in the Curriculum and
Instruction doctoral program.


MC Journal: The Journal of Academic Media Librarianship
ISSN 1069-6792
v.4 #1, Summer 1996

July 1996

This article copyright (C) by Lucy C. Morse and Barbara Truman. All
Rights Reserved. All commercial use requires permission of the author
and the editors of this journal.


*Page 24*