Distance Education and Academic Policy: Making It All Fit By Barry Willis

O nce the content is developed, the soft- ware is field tested and revised, the hardware system is in place, and im- plementation begins, many distance educators and administrators believe

the work is done and it's time to move on to the next challenge.

In reality though, this isn't true...especially if the distance delivered course or curriculum is effective and in demand. This is because the dis- tance delivery of instruction utilizing telecommu- nications (i.e., "distance education") can solve many problems in higher education, but can also create some problems of its own. The more effec- tive and in demand the instruction is, the more lo- gistical challenges it will create.

Some of these challenges are obvious and are repeatedly discussed. They include systems com- patibility, delivery logistics and, of course, the technology itself.

Although initially less visible, there are numer- ous related concerns that must be successfully overcome if the instruction is to favorably impact the learner. These more mundane but essential ar- eas include faculty development and the identifica- tion and resolution of procedural issues related to academic policy and program delivery.

As critical and complex as these issues and needs are in a single campus, single administration setting, the complexity of potential problems in- creases exponentially when the instruction is de- livered statewide to various university campuses each with a unique mission, priorities, and some- what varied academic policy. Such is the case with the recently restructured University of Alas- ka System.

With a total land mass equal to 20 percent of the continental United States, a limited and de- tached road system, diverse culture, and a state- wide population of 500,000, Alaska found itself thrust into the distance education arena by neces- sity, not choice.

Barry Willis directs statewide distance education efforts for the University of Alaska System and re- sides in Eagle River, Alaska

32 Teeh Trends

� 9 � 9 e d u c a t i o n c a n so lve m a n y p r o b l e m s in h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n bu t c a n a lso c r e a t e s o m e p r o b l e m s of i ts o w n .

Beginning in the late 1970's the University moved ahead to develop and implement varied technological systems including audio, television, computers, and interactive video.

In terms of effectiveness, the initial results were limited. With the drop in revenues brought on by a precipitous decline in oil prices in the mid- 1980's, the University system "downsized" in 1987, from three Universities and 11 community colleges to three University centers and one com- munity college. At the same time, the University reduced its distance delivery network, focusing on elements proven instructionally and cost effective over time. These remaining technological elements include statewide audio conferencing with 280 sites, computer mail, two-way interactive televi- sion, and pre-packaged telecourse delivery where student needs and content requirements demanded it.

Despite ten years of trial and error resulting in a technologically advanced and somewhat respon- sive system, problems continued to hinder effec- tive statewide utilization. Although inconsistencies in academic policy and subtle but pervasive terri- torial disputes were suspected, the parameters of the problem were not explored.

This changed in late 1988 when a statewide dis- tance education needs assessment was conducted to accomplish two goals:

1. Identify the various logistical, technical, and procedural issues and needs that must be ad- dressed when instruction is distance delivered be- tween relatively autonomous university campuses; and

2. Prioritize the order in which these identified needs and issues should be resolved.

In September and October 1988, 44 teachers, administrators and staff (e.g., media services per- sonnel) involved in the distance delivery of in- struction throughout the University of Alaska sys- tem were interviewed and asked to identify issues and needs that hinder the effective multicampus

Alaska found i tsel f thrust into the distance educat ion arena by necessity, not choice.

distance delivery of instruction in a statewide uni- versity context. With an 89 percent return rate, the following ten issues were identified in the needs assessment and are listed here in order of priority based on the data analysis:

1. Develop academic policies and procedures for the statewide delivery of courses related to credit, headcount, the equitable distribution of telecommunication transmission costs, and stu- dent support services.

2. Resolve faculty development issues, includ- ing released time, workload, and copyright.

3. Resolve instructional development issues, including needs assessment, course development, and evaluation.

4. Develop a master listing of current distance delivered courses filling specific degree require- ments.

5. Develop distance education courses for sys- temwide delivery.

6. Develop and coordinate upper division dis- tance delivered courses.

7. Develop policies and criteria for the evalua- tion, selection, and utilization of compatible hard- ware.

8. Explore external sources for funding dis- tance delivered courses.

9. Research effective distance delivery teach- ing strategies.

10. Develop policies and criteria for the evalua- tion, selection, and utilization of compatible soft- ware and hardware.

In addition to analyzing the priority rankings for the group as a whole, rankings were individually analyzed for all teachers and administrators. In general, the rankings of these two groups were similar with identical rankings for the highest four priority areas.

The results indicate the logical, if circuitous, progression that a diverse statewide university system goes through when implementing distance education on a systemwide basis.

In the University of Alaska system, the first few years of involvement resulted in trial and error as different technologies were implemented, evaluat- ed, and either accepted or rejected. This hardware emphasis evolved into the need for flexible soft- ware responsive to the needs of varied learners. Although not surprising, it is evident that the more urban campuses are able to make effective use of prepackaged telecourses that are, in general, de- signed to reach relatively homogenous audiences. In contrast, more heterogenous rural learners re- quire more teacher intervention and flexible pro-

gramming. In these settings, audio conferencing, computers, slow scan, and single concept video have been most effective, with emphasis placed on the interactive capabilities of these technologies.

All learner groups, whether urban or rural, have found audio conferencing to be instructionally and cost effective, primarily because of its ease of use, teacher control, interactivity, and inherent flexibil- ity.

After years of experimenting with varied tech- nologies ranging from "low tech" to very sophisti- cated, the systems that have lasted the test of time have similar characteristcs. These characteristics include ease of teacher/student control and use, high interactivity, and low maintenance---with flexible interaction being the most critical factor by far.

As indicated by the needs assessment, current concerns, at least on a systemwide basis, focus on traditional academic policy issues brought on and magnified by wide-scale utilization of non-tradi- tional delivery methods. These "nuts and bolts" academic policy needs relate to credit transfer, faculty work load, cost sharing for instructional/ faculty development, and the provision of student support services.

It is also interesting that, for the most part, these questions of academic procedures were non- issues until quite recently. One could surmise that it has taken several years of exploration and utili- zation for administrators and teachers to develop the long term confidence in the technological sys- tem to warrant dealing with the mundane, but crit- ical, academic policy issues.

Although institutions of higher education are slow to learn from the mistakes of others, it should be possible to avoid some of the "error" resulting from this "trial and error" approach to distance education. Multi-dimensional needs as- sessment, formative evaluation, and more empha- sis on "planning" not just "doing" would result in a straightforward approach with greater, long term cost effectiveness. Statewide systems of higher education contemplating the eventual widescale implementation of distance education efforts would do well to review, scrutinize, and evolve traditonal academic policies in concert with the distance education systems that they incorporate. Such planning would enable the institution to more effectively capitalize on the benefits of wide- scale distance education while minimizing the dif- ficulties that result when non-traditional instruc- tional delivery methods are utilized in traditional educational settings. �9

MAY/JUNE 33