the distinctiveness of australian distance education – the

THE DISTINCTIVENESS OF AUSTRALIAN DISTANCE EDUCATION – THE PRESENT AND THE NEXT DECADE

Bruce King

Plus ça change ...

“The Australian education scene has been subject to almost continuous change over the last decade, and distance education has been affected as much as any sector”

Keith Harry, 1999 – government policy Equally true 2011 – technological change Predicting 2021 – defensible guesses, likely

to fall short of actuality Question: Should we be optimistic or

pessimistic?

Distance education?

Totality of arrangements made by institution

For students separated from teachers For whom some resources &

arrangements have to be prepared in advance

These might involve special systems & processes

Students require well-organised support Includes institutional attention to

logistics of communication

My bias ...

Distance education is a purposeful, values-driven enterprise

“The arrangements” should follow the purposes of the program

They should not undermine values base of what we do

DE not synonomous with online or e-learning although they have enormous potential to enhance what we do

Distinctive?

Any distinctiveness is product of a set of characteristics: Cross sectoral Strong equity rationale Almost exclusively dual mode No national DE specialist institution Small but hugely dispersed student population Early involvement with transnational education Parity with on-campus provision Limited engagement with notions of openness Limited use of face to face support Losing ground to flexible delivery for all Practitioners have lost their way

Lost their way ...?

Fragmentation of distinctive clientele Marginalisation of ethos of DE Breaking down of specialist systems Removal of political support for DE Movement away from any intellectual

leadership Sense of personal dislocation in face of

change - educational values brushed aside in compromises with technological developments

Changes in context of universities

Changing government attitudes Massification Accountability and standards Internationalisation and competition Resources and staffing Impact of technology

Is there a distinctive role in future?

If there is, it will be because of we refocus on the needs of off-campus and regional students

Need to understand and accommodate their learning milieu

Should not just be good followers of technological developments but investigate potential to support distinctive needs of students

Focus should be less on teaching and more on student support

Will we retain parity?

Only if we avoid cost saving strategies that diminish DE experience

Must avoid disaggregation of academic functions, especially assessment

Will be faced with real competition over performance

Will we manage technology? Need to remember:

Enthusiasm for and expertise with technology is not equally spread

A sense of personal deficiency impacts on all professional functions

In mixed mode, too few have teaching qualifications on-campus and DE adds to personal difficulties

Rate of change of technologies can compound sense of under-performance

Professional development is expensive, time-consuming (although well understood)

Will we be teaching well?

Not just a matter of the tools available, but an understanding of ethos of DE

Our role should be purposeful and value driven

All decisions should be driven by fostering learning, and not privilege other dimensions, e.g. student freedom

Optimism or pessimism?

Much that is positive – options seem boundless But we could be confronting a perfect storm:

Casualisation Private challenges to monopoly on professional

accreditation Cost saving institutional strategies End of dual mode & sense of identity Potential demise of OUA - less flexibility For-profits exploiting customer relationship expertise Danger that we privilege teaching over support

Business as usual is just not an option